Health data in the headlines: a changing media landscape, explores how the use of health data is portrayed across media, social and AI channels; which narratives ignite the debate and which channels reach the widest audiences.
The report examines the changing narratives shaping public confidence in health data use and highlights the growing importance of issues such as AI, NHS reform, commercial involvement and data sovereignty. It points to an important opportunity for policymakers, health leaders and technology providers alike – to pick apart why certain concerns resonate so strongly, the trade-offs being made in a time of major health data reform, and the importance of public confidence to realise the success of forthcoming programmes.
Read the full report here.
What we did
This report builds on Portland’s 2021 analysis of UK media and social media coverage of health data stories.
It combines analysis of 1,329 media articles across national, healthcare, technology and campaigning outlets with social listening research, public attitudes polling and a review of how leading AI tools present information about health data.
Rather than simply measuring positive and negative sentiment, the research assessed how coverage influences perceptions of both the benefits and risks of health data use, while tracking key themes including AI governance, cybersecurity, patient consent, data sovereignty and NHS reform.
Key findings
The COVID-era consensus has gone
Health data coverage now looks balanced on the surface – 45% positive and 43% negative – but the biggest trust stories are sharply critical. Palantir and the Federated Data Platform generated 243 articles that were 84% negative; cybersecurity coverage was 85% negative across 97 articles; and consent and opt-out stories were 93% negative across 44 articles. Meanwhile, positive stories about AI deployment and digital transformation are largely staying within specialist audiences.
Positive stories are not reaching the public
Positive coverage is concentrated in healthcare trade media, which produced over half of all articles and was 57% positive – but reaches only around 4.3 million monthly readers. National media is 55% negative and reaches more than 472 million monthly visitors. In practice, risk-led narratives reach an audience around 110 times larger than benefit-led ones.
Health data is now a political story
The debate has moved beyond privacy and consent into questions of power, governance and sovereignty. Coverage of Palantir and the Federated Data Platform rose from 40 articles in 2025 to 203 in the first half of 2026, making it one of the defining stories in the dataset. Health data is increasingly being framed around government accountability, foreign technology providers and who should control NHS data.
Looking ahead
The report identifies opportunities for policymakers, NHS leaders, researchers and technology providers to build and maintain public confidence, recognising it as a critical foundation for the success of future health data initiatives.
- Get positive stories into the outlets people actually read: Stories about tangible patient benefits, improved services and successful uses of health data need to reach broader audiences, rather than remaining within specialist sectors. Communicating patient impact clearly and accessibly is critical.
- Land in the right places: public information sources are evolving: The findings suggest that building trust requires more than promoting benefits. Issues such as privacy, consent, governance and commercial involvement need to be openly discussed and addressed, particularly where concerns are already influencing public behaviour such as data opt-outs.
- Own the channel where balanced stories are already winning: As debates increasingly take place through social platforms and AI-powered search tools, organisations need to adapt their communications accordingly. Trusted voices, accessible content and transparent explanations will be essential to helping people navigate complex health data issues.
Read the full report here.
A note on the findings
Portland’s analysis found Palantir and the NHS Federated Data Platform emerging as a prominent focus in recent coverage.
These findings should not be read as an assessment of the NHS Federated Data Platform itself, nor as a judgement from UPD on Palantir or any organisation. Rather, they show how concerns about the use of health data are aligned to wider social and ethical issues, including confidence in public institutions – and how these concerns play out in the media. With Palantir, distinct questions are often collapsed into one debate: is the software fit for purpose? Is the governance strong enough? Do corporate and NHS values align – and should the NHS rely on US technology companies at all?
As the NHS embarks on major reforms, including introducing the Single Patient Record and Health Data Research Service, the report points to a broader challenge for policymakers, health leaders and technology providers – to address these concerns in the round, while being clear about the specific issues involved and the wider context in which they arise.
Understanding Patient Data in 2026: navigating public confidence in a changing health data system
Health Data in the Headlines: a changing media landscape is a companion report to UPD's first State of the Nation report, Understanding Patient Data in 2026: navigating public confidence in a changing health data system.
It provides the media and public discourse strand of the evidence base, examining how health data is discussed across national media, trade media, social media and AI platforms. By exploring the narratives, concerns and information sources that shape public attitudes, trust and perceptions of risk, the research helps explain the wider context in which public confidence is formed.
Alongside UPD's UK Patient Data Sentiment Tracker, it contributes to the report's robust and comprehensive evidence base.
Acknowledgements
This report presents research commissioned by Understanding Patient Data and conducted by Portland into UK media coverage and public discourse on health data use. It assesses how narratives, concerns and opportunities have developed over the last five years.
The analysis and findings presented are based on Portland’s independent research and assessment of the evidence. Portland is responsible for the research methodology, analysis and conclusions, while Understanding Patient Data directed the project scope, oversight and publication of the report.