In a statement to the United Nations marking the 80th anniversary of the Department of Global Communications, the UK Government presented media freedom and information integrity as closely connected policy issues. The intervention backed the UN's role as a trusted source of information during a period of heightened geopolitical tension and armed conflict. This placed the discussion within a multilateral policy frame rather than a narrow media debate. In the UK's account, access to verified information now sits alongside crisis response, conflict prevention and trust in public institutions.
The statement's first substantive warning concerned the pace at which threats to information integrity are expanding, with the misuse of artificial intelligence identified as a major accelerant. The Government pointed to the World Economic Forum's Global Risk Report, which it said has ranked misinformation and disinformation among the most severe global risks for three consecutive years. The wording was notable for treating disinformation as an intentional instrument used by state and non-state actors, not as a passive feature of online debate. According to the UK statement, information manipulation is being deployed deliberately to sharpen tensions, aggravate conflicts, undermine democratic institutions and mislead international audiences.
The clearest example cited by the Government was Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The statement said Russia has conducted an information warfare campaign alongside the conflict, using disinformation to distort facts, weaken international support for Ukraine and divert attention from events on the ground. The UK said it will continue to counter what it described as malign Russian information operations and noted that, working with partners, it has sanctioned 40 enablers of Russian information manipulation. For officials following sanctions policy, that indicates hostile information activity is being handled not only through public diplomacy but through coercive economic measures as well.
The statement also widened the focus beyond Europe by condemning disinformation campaigns aimed at UN peacekeeping operations. According to the UK, attempts to discredit the UN and turn local populations against Blue Helmets are dangerous because they weaken the credibility of missions that depend on local trust, operational legitimacy and accurate public communication. The Government said it supports the UN project "Addressing Mis- and Disinformation and Hate Speech Threats" as a practical tool for responding to narratives directed at peacekeepers. The policy significance is straightforward: information integrity is being treated not only as a values issue, but as a condition for mission safety and effectiveness.
On media freedom, the UK restated its position that independent journalism is essential to human rights protection, democratic accountability and public understanding of war. The statement cited Committee to Protect Journalists reporting that 2024 and 2025 were the deadliest years on record for journalists and media workers, with particular concern for Gaza, Lebanon, Ukraine and Sudan. The legal framing was equally clear. The UK condemned violence against journalists and media workers, reiterated that international humanitarian law protects civilian journalists during armed conflict, and called for attacks on media workers to be investigated with those responsible prosecuted under national and international law.
The statement also highlighted coalition-based diplomacy. As co-chair of the Media Freedom Coalition with Finland, the UK said it will continue to promote strong, independent public-interest journalism globally. For policy readers, that indicates the UK's position is not limited to condemning abuses after the event. It also rests on coalition work, norm-setting and support for institutions that sustain reporting in hostile or fragile settings.
In its closing section, the UK linked information integrity to the Sustainable Development Goals, multilingualism, the Global Digital Compact and wider efforts to close the digital divide. The statement argued that expanding internet access must go hand in hand with access to accurate and reliable information. Taken together, the intervention set out a coherent foreign policy position in which sanctions, journalist protection, UN peacekeeping, digital governance and development policy are treated as part of the same agenda. The message from the UK Government was that media freedom is no longer a stand-alone rights issue; it now sits within a broader framework of security, international law and digital governance.