What does the journalist believe about the issue your charity works on? Do they think things are getting better or worse? And does it even matter?
Results from our latest survey of 152 journalists suggest it matters quite a lot. How journalists perceive past progress on an issue is closely linked to how optimistic they feel about the future. That combination of backward and forward-looking sentiment is likely to shape which stories get told and how.
See the end of this blog for the chart mentioned throughout, and its image description.
The link between progress and optimism
When journalists were asked about progress made over the last twenty years and their outlook for the next twenty, a clear pattern emerged: the issues where journalists see the most progress are also the issues where they feel most optimistic that things will improve. The relationship is almost linear across a wide range of causes.
Cancer sits at the top right of that picture, with high perceived progress and high optimism. Dementia, heart disease, gender equality, mental health and attitudes to homophobia also score well on both counts. These are causes where journalists broadly believe the dial has moved and where they expect it to keep moving.
At the other end of the chart, refugees, homelessness and poverty in the UK cluster together, with low perceived progress and low optimism that things will improve. Climate change and human rights sit in a similar position; journalists don't feel much has changed and they're not confident it will.
The charities cutting through on optimistic causes
On issues where journalists feel hopeful, it is perhaps unsurprising that some charities are making a strong impression.
Cancer Research UK was mentioned repeatedly for the proactiveness of its media team, described by journalists as responsive, helpful, friendly and knowledgeable. But some comments also spoke of positivity around the cause. Words like "breakthroughs" and "impact" came up. This is a good reminder that effective media relations is not just about accessibility: it is about having something credible and compelling to say.
The issues falling furthest behind
Some of the starkest findings come from issues where journalists are pessimistic despite sustained public and charitable activity. Poverty in the UK and homelessness score particularly poorly on both axes. Refugees score the lowest of all on optimism, journalists seem uncertain that things will improve. For charities working on these issues, communications could focus either on shifting that perception or to leaning into the urgency it creates.
Shelter was mentioned by journalists as impressing them for “holding governments to account” and for their Made in Social Housing campaign, which a journalist described as an “important addition in the conversation about social housing”.
It is also worth noting that journalists are generally less optimistic than MPs across most issues – perhaps because politicians, who set the agenda and hold the levers of change, have more power to be optimistic. For charities, that gap is a useful reminder that the media environment in which you are operating may be more sceptical than the political one.
The middle ground: where reliability becomes the differentiator
Not every cause sits at either extreme. For issues where journalists hold no strong feelings of progress or optimism, neither hopeful nor despairing, the challenge for charities is a different one. Without a compelling narrative tailwind, the relationship itself becomes the asset.
Research from a parallel nfpResearch study with Irish journalists points to what matters most for journalists: reliability and proactivity. Journalists particularly value charities that make their lives easier, such as having a credible spokesperson ready to comment or being a dependable source for perspectives from someone with lived experience. When the cause itself isn't generating momentum, being the organisation a journalist turns to instinctively carries real strategic value.
And, while older people as a cause sits firmly in the centre of the graph, Age UK has nonetheless managed to stand out: journalists describe the organisation as "proactive to topical events and quick to respond to requests". In a space with some ambivalence, that consistency of presence helps to be noticed.
What this means for your communications
For any charity, understanding where your issue sits in journalists' minds and whether they see it as a cause for hope or for despair can help inform how you communicate.
A journalist who is already optimistic about your cause may be a willing champion for a forward-looking campaign. One who sees little evidence of progress may need you to make the case for change more explicitly, or may be more naturally drawn to stories of crisis than of solution.
And for issues sitting at the bottom of the chart (poverty, homelessness, refugees), charities may want to think carefully about how to build a credible case for optimism without minimising the scale of the problem. That is a difficult balance to strike, but one the data suggests is worth attempting.
The most resonant charity communications do not just document a problem: they make people believe change is possible. For some causes, journalists are already there; for others, that work is still to do – and, for those in the middle, where journalists have no strong feelings either way, the prize may be less about shifting perception and more about becoming indispensable: the organisation that is always reachable, always relevant and always worth a call.
Understanding the lens through which journalists view your issue can help guide you in the best route to capture their attention and how to frame your communications to have the biggest impact.
Find out more: New report: what Irish journalists want from charities
We will be running the 2026 research with journalists soon! If you'd like to hear more about the research and taking part, please get in touch.
Image description
The chart shows the public perceptions of different issues with optimism on the vertical axis and progress on the horizontal axis. The title reads “Last twenty years vs Next twenty years”.
Optimism is determined by responses to the question "to what extent they think the situation will become better or worse for the following issues or groups in the next twenty years?” Results in this section are intended to show the proportion of people who think conditions will improve, combining responses for “it will improve a lot” and “it will improve a little”.
Progress is determined by the question: “To what extent do you think that the situation has changed for the better or worse for the following issues or groups in the last twenty years?” This section focuses on the proportion of respondents who believe things have improved, combining “it has improved a lot” and “it has improved a little”.
It presents both questions side by side, allowing comparison between how people think things have changed over the past twenty years and how they expect them to change in the next twenty years. Highlighting where expectations for the future are stronger or weaker than perceptions of past improvement.