Despite great volume of research into press–state relations, we know little about how journalists use information that has been generated through independent bureaucratic processes. The present study addresses this gap by investigating the role of freedom of information (FOI) laws in journalism practice. By surveying journalists (n = 164), interviewing activists and civil servants (n = 7) and submitting FOI requests to twenty-one ministerial departments in the United Kingdom, this study explores press-state interactions and the limits of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) application to advance the media’s monitorial function. The results show that journalists perceive FOIA as an essential tool for their work. However, they often described their experience as negative. They reported refusals lacking legal ground, delays, not responding at all or differential treatment. In response to gating access, journalists might also adopt tactics that use loopholes in the law. The press-state interactions, already marked by suspicion, thus, continue to perpetuate distrust. These findings might have implications for journalism practices, FOIAs’ potential for government oversight and democracy. In particular, the differential treatment of requests undermines equality under the law, one of the fundamental democratic principles. The study concludes with several policy recommendations for FOIA reform to meet journalists’ needs better.

尽管对新闻与国家关系进行了大量研究，但我们对记者如何使用通过独立官僚程序生成的信息知之甚少。本研究通过调查信息自由（FOI）法在新闻业实践中的作用来解决这一差距。通过调查记者（n  = 164），采访积极分子和公务员（n = 7）并将FOI要求提交给英国的21个部级部门，该研究探讨了新闻媒体与州之间的互动以及《信息自由法》（FOIA）的适用范围，以提高媒体的监督职能。结果表明，记者认为FOIA是他们工作的重要工具。但是，他们经常将自己的经历描述为负面的。他们报告说，拒绝的理由缺乏法律依据，拖延，根本没有回应或区别对待。作为对门禁的回应，记者可能还会采取利用法律漏洞的策略。因此，已经以怀疑为特征的新闻界与国家之间的互动继续使人们不信任。这些发现可能对新闻实践，FOIAs对政府监督和民主的潜力有影响。特别是，对请求的区别对待破坏了法律的平等，法律是根本的民主原则之一。该研究最后提出了一些有关FOIA改革的政策建议，以更好地满足记者的需求。