King's College London

Leading English-language news outlets often misuse the term “hard-right” to describe far-right political movements, potentially softening their extremist image and boosting their electoral appeal, according to a new study published in the journal European Political Science.

The research, conducted by Dr Georgios Samaras from King's College London's School for Government, analysed 140 articles from seven outlets published between 2022 and 2025.

It argues that while the term “hard-right” has virtually no academic foundation, it has proliferated across newsrooms, obscuring crucial distinctions between mainstream conservatism and genuinely extremist movements.

It found journalists routinely apply the vague "hard-right" label to parties with vastly different ideological profiles and degrees of extremism.

For example, Germany's AfD, currently under surveillance by intelligence agencies for extremist activities, was repeatedly labelled “hard-right” rather than far-right, even when articles discussed the party's connections to neo-Nazism

Hungary’s Fidesz party, widely documented for undermining democratic institutions, was often characterised as “populist hard-right” without examination of its illiberal governance.

And France's Rassemblement National and Austria's FPÖ – the latter founded by a former SS officer – were grouped together with less extreme parties under blanket “hard-right” terminology.

The research reveals several patterns in the coverage analysed:

• Label inflation: Outlets routinely conflate distinct far-right currents – from populist nationalists to neo-fascist movements – under a single umbrella term.
  
  
• Strategic ambiguity: The vague terminology allows media organisations to signal concern about extremism while avoiding potential legal liability for defamation.
  
  
• Inconsistent application: The same outlets that use “hard-right” for extremist European parties often label left-wing groups as “far-left”, suggesting ideological double standards.
  
  
• Academic disconnect: Unlike established political science terminology, “hard-right” lacks conceptual clarity and appears predominantly in journalistic rather than academic contexts.

The research argues these patterns play directly into far-right parties’ rebranding efforts. Leaders such as Italy's Giorgia Meloni and Germany's Alice Weidel have successfully pressured media outlets to avoid "far-right" labels while presenting their agendas as "common sense" politics, the study says.

It calls for reforms to journalistic practices, including adopting established political science frameworks that differentiate between types of far-right ideologies, along with clearer editorial guidelines that mean labels are used in context with specific policy stances, voting records or coalition histories.

Dr Georgios Samaras, Lecturer in Public Policy at King’s College London’s School for Government, said:

“This linguistic ambiguity has real-world consequences – it helps far-right parties rebrand themselves as moderate while avoiding the stigma associated with more accurate labels. And when media organisations blur the boundaries between legitimate conservatism and extremism, they compromise citizens' ability to make informed political judgements."