Matthew James Goodwin, a prominent American political scientist, just questioned the public’s management of the UK’s grooming gangs incident, suggesting that it has not received enough protection. His comment sparked criticism from some reporters, but Goodwin is undeterred. He made the decision to examine the information more in-depth to evaluate how the media handled the subject.
Using information to research the problem
Goodwin used Lexis, a dataset employed by researchers to observe information across UK papers, to analyze media coverage from 2011 to 2025. He made certain to account for criticisms, especially addressing how the word “grooming groups” is used in the press. His results, he insists, may shed light on how the incident has been covered—or neglected.
internet lull before 2011
Despite spreading rumours and urging it from organizations like the BNP and EDL, one of Goodwin’s major points is that the internet largely ignored the pampering groups problems up until 2011. He praised The Times ‘ Andrew Norfolk for starting earlier cover despite abuse and harassment. No major media outlet really began to cover the issue until 2011 when it wasn’t until 2011.
The statistics don’t rest: Grooming gangs vs another scandals
From 2011 to 2025, Goodwin found a full of 4, 659 reports about grooming groups. On the surface, this may seem like a large amount, but when compared to protection of different topics, it appears little. For example, the term” white privilege” appeared in 6, 146 articles, “anti-Muslim” in 17, 152, and” Islamophobia” in 23, 461.
Medial comparative lack of attention
Goodwin points out that despite there being outlets that covered the cleaning gangs problem, such as The Times, the cover still falls short in comparison to other racial-related stories. In fact, publications like The Guardian had just 113 reports about grooming groups during the same time, compared to over 3, 000 content on” Islamophobia”.
The BBC’s protection is equally skewed. Goodwin found 357 special mentions of grooming groups in BBC News and Radio 4 records, while George Floyd’s event generated over 7, 500 mentions, and” Islamophobia” garnered over 2, 000.
Cultural and political illegal
The social scientist believes that the relative internet silence on grooming groups may be attributed to the public’s reluctance to issue narratives surrounding immigration, diversity, and “diversity”. He contends that these issues are too politically sensitive for the majority of the media to address them openly, especially when they might conflict with the predominant liberal viewpoints held by the educated elites who control the majority of the UK’s media.
A national scandal that can’t be ignored
Goodwin praises Elon Musk in a passionate appeal for forcing the UK to face this global scandal. Millions are now learning about the horrors of the grooming gangs for the first time or discovering new, shocking details thanks to Musk’s influence. Goodwin believes that this new awareness will prompt the public to ponder important issues: Why was this ignored? Who is accountable? What’s being done to stop it?
A call for accountability
Goodwin concludes by urging the UK media to take the scandal seriously. He thinks the media should bring the subject to the forefront, give it the attention it deserves, and steer clear of distractions like the passing of a single American man. The British public, he argues, is paying attention, and it’s time for the media to do the same.
As Goodwin puts it,” Find the truth and tell us the truth. That’s your job”.
