Right-wing media watch: The Daily Mail’s anti-university crusade

You never have to wait long for the Daily Mail to produce another eyebrow-raising front page.

This week’s offering was a particularly striking:

“Is university a waste of money?”

Beneath it sat the equally alarming subheading:

“As shocking study shows HALF of debt-ridden graduates earn less than average wage five years after leaving…”

Naturally intrigued by what exactly was this “shocking study” and who produced it, I hastily turned to page four, where all was revealed. The analysis came from Policy Exchange, the influential right-wing think tank that has received funding from the US oil giant ExxonMobil and from investor Paul Marshall, the GB News co-owner whose hedge fund holds substantial stakes in fossil fuel companies.

According to the Mail, the report represents the latest evidence of a supposed “collapse” in the university premium, the additional earnings graduates typically enjoy over non-graduates during their working lives.

Alongside the report’s findings, readers are presented with warnings from commentators that Labour’s policies are stifling growth and damaging job prospects. A poll showing that a third of Britons now believe university is no longer worth the time and cost is also deployed as further evidence that higher education is failing.

Policy Exchange itself describes the findings as evidence of a “wholesale collapse in outcomes, standards and the graduate premium” caused by the “mass expansion and marketisation” of universities.

The report also takes aim at degree classifications, noting that the proportion of First-Class degrees awarded has more than doubled over the past 18 years, from 13 percent in 2006 – 07 to 30 percent in 2024 – 25, implying that top grades have been devalued.

A predictable cast is assembled to add to the furore. Shadow education secretary Laura Trott argues that too many young people have been “pushed into courses that leave them with large debts, limited teaching time and poor employment prospects.”

Reform UK’s education spokesman Suella Braverman describes the university system as “rigged” and claims young people have been “sold a lie” while the country faces shortages of nurses, builders and care workers.

Only towards the end of the article is an alternative perspective offered. Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, is finally given space to respond. It points out that the report fails to account for graduates who are working part-time, undertaking further study or pursuing career paths where earnings typically rise later.

Vivienne Stern, the organisation’s chief executive, described the analysis as “wrong-headed.” She noted that only 3 percent of graduates are unemployed, compared with 6 percent of the wider working-age population. She also highlighted evidence showing that just 8 percent of graduates regret attending university and that, by age 31, graduate earnings are on average 37 percent higher than those of non-graduates.

Articles like this making their way onto the front pages of our national newspapers carry worrying echoes of a familiar narrative in the United States, where Donald Trump and his allies have spent years portraying universities as wasteful, ideologically captured institutions undeserving of public trust and support.

Fortunately, many readers were unconvinced.

“Is reading the Daily Mail a complete waste of time and money? Is reading reports by mysteriously funded right-wing think tanks a complete waste of energy?” wrote one commenter.

Another said: “The Daily Mail has all the editorial gravitas of the Beano, but without the fun factor.”

Another reader focused on the timing of the front page itself:

“What’s the message for people taking their A-levels right now? Shocking.”

Whether university is the right choice will always depend on the individual, the course and the career path. But reducing a complex debate about education, skills and economic opportunity to a sensational front-page question backed by a politically aligned think tank does little to inform the public.

It does, however, make for an attention-grabbing headline.