Cash-rich Reform UK launches fightback with new media platform

Reform UK’s new media platform is a planned daily streaming channel built on its existing YouTube operation. The party wants it to publish interviews, documentaries and other programmes while presenting Reform’s message in a more controlled way. It matters because the party believes established broadcasters treat it unfairly.

The planned channel resembles Donald Trump’s Trump TV, which the article describes as a 24-hour stream of White House-sanctioned content. Reform expects an initial budget above £10 million and plans to hire 25 journalists and editors. Twelve media job adverts have already appeared.

The channel would expand Reform’s current output of roughly eight YouTube posts each week into a daily service. Party officials say it could train more media performers and reduce pressure on Reform’s eight lawmakers, who often face mainstream interviews. The platform is part of a wider spending programme funded by major donations.

Reform UK has raised £87 million from private donors so far this year. Reuters’ analysis described that as the largest private annual fundraising haul by any major political party in Europe. The figure puts Reform ahead of Germany’s centre-right Christian Democratic Union, or CDU, which raised £86.3 million in 2024.

The comparison is striking because Reform is a relatively new party, while the CDU is an established major European party. Reform’s total includes donations, with further contributions expected. Two crypto businessmen, Christopher Harborne and Ben Delo, supplied £72 million between them, giving Reform an unusually large financial base.

The money exceeds the fundraising totals of Britain’s Labour and Conservative parties, according to the article. It lets Reform prepare for an election due by mid-2029, rather than concentrating mainly on immediate fundraising. The party plans to fund headquarters, media, policy work, advisers and campaign operations.

Christopher Harborne and Ben Delo are crypto businessmen whose donations transformed Reform UK’s finances. Together, they gave the party £72 million in September. The article presents them as wealthy donors who believe Reform is the only party capable of fixing Britain.

Each donor contributed £36 million, and both payments were frontloaded so Reform could prepare for the next election. Delo’s donation came as he was concentrating on philanthropy after leaving FinTech. Harborne described Reform as a start-up party needing more money than membership fees could provide.

The donations matter because they finance a much broader operation than routine campaigning. About half of the £72 million is intended to run party headquarters until the election expected by mid-2029. The rest can support the new media channel, policy development, advisers and campaign expansion. Both donors said they wanted nothing in return, and a source said Delo attached no conditions.

Reform UK wants its own channel because it believes established broadcasters give the party an unfair hearing. Gawain Towler said the media claims to represent all opinions but, in Reform’s view, wants to portray the party as “horrible”. The channel would let Reform communicate directly with voters.

The mechanism is editorial control. Instead of waiting for invitations or accepting the format of broadcast interviews, Reform could choose its speakers, topics and presentation. It plans daily programming, including interviews and documentaries, built on an existing YouTube service that already posts about eight times a week.

This approach also responds to the pressure on Reform’s eight lawmakers, who can face mainstream media appearances several times a week. A larger in-house team could train more media performers and supply regular material. However, the party’s strategy follows damaging coverage of donations and racist comments, so its effort to control the message will be tested against continuing scrutiny.

Reform’s spending could turn a small, fast-growing party into a more permanent national organisation before the next election. The money is intended to support headquarters, media production, policy development, advisers and campaign operations. That matters because Reform wants to be ready for government, not merely compete for votes.

The clearest example is the planned media operation. More than £10 million would fund about 25 journalists and editors, while additional staff could train party media performers. The party also plans a newspaper with an initial print run of 15 million. These projects would give Reform more ways to distribute its message.

The investment may also reduce dependence on fundraising and overworked lawmakers. Officials say about half of the £72 million donation will run headquarters until mid-2029. Yet risks remain. Labour could change donation rules, potentially forcing Reform to return the money, and the party remains under police and parliamentary scrutiny over earlier funding and alleged misconduct.

A party-controlled streaming channel is designed to promote and explain Reform’s position. Independent news broadcasting has a separate editorial role, with journalists expected to investigate claims, question politicians and decide coverage without taking instructions from the party. Reform’s planned service would therefore give viewers direct access to party content, but not the same editorial independence.

The difference lies in who controls selection and presentation. Reform could choose its interview subjects, questions, documentaries and political framing. Its planned 25 journalists and editors would work within a party-funded operation, unlike reporters working for independent broadcasters. The article compares the idea with Donald Trump’s Trump TV, which airs White House-sanctioned content.

Voters would have alternatives for checking claims. They could compare Reform’s programmes with reporting from established broadcasters and newspapers, statements from Labour and the Conservatives, and original public records where available. Independent fact-checking and scrutiny from journalists, researchers or parliamentary investigations could also provide checks. The article says Reform is already facing such scrutiny over funding and candidate comments.

The article does not explain the United Kingdom’s full donation framework. In general, UK political parties must accept donations from legally permissible sources, report significant donations and follow rules overseen by the Electoral Commission. Donations from impermissible foreign sources are restricted. The system also includes reporting and enforcement requirements, rather than a simple ban on every large gift.

Very large private donations can raise accountability questions because one or two wealthy individuals may give a party resources far beyond ordinary membership income. That can increase their influence, even when donors say they expect nothing in return. It can also make voters ask whether future policy or access could be affected. The article quotes an academic asking whether large donors might receive favours.

Reform says Harborne and Delo attached no strings to their £72 million. Still, the party faces investigations over earlier funding, including £5 million from Harborne. The article also says Labour could change donation rules and potentially force Reform to return the funds, a possibility party officials say they would contest.