Why is Britain, and especially the British press, so adverse to all things EU? EuroparlTV crosses the Channel in search of answers.

Reporter: Euroscepticism in the UK

Britain, famous for its tea, royalty  and distaste of all things EU.

We went to London to see why it has  the reputation of being very Eurosceptic

and why Britain is so adverse  to its continental cousins.

England is half-hearted about it.  They want the benefits of Europe

but they don't want to suffer  its bad points.

The majority of people in this country  are totally and completely anti-Europe.

I just get on with my life, do my little bit.

And let Europe get on with its thing?  -Eat my chicken. That's what I do.

there are sure to be varying views  on Europe and how it's reported.

To delve into the matter, we spoke to  a former press officer,

a professor, and journalists representing  pro-Europe and Eurosceptic camps,

who all have a different definition  of UK Euroscepticism.

Scepticism is the essence  of British journalism.

Since the 1980s  we've been lumbered with this term,

which covers a whole range  of phenomena,

starting from outright Europhobia,  hostility to European integration,

At the far end, there are the Europhobes.

They're almost xenophobes.  They don't like anything not British.

But as you come back  to the more moderate area,

Some people would call themselves  Eurorealists.

Euroscepticism means something else  to people in the Brussels institutions.

It means people who criticise them and  they're either a Eurosceptic or a populist.

In the 1970s, Britain voted in favour  of joining the European Community.

36 years later,  newspapers and Conservatives

are calling for a referendum  on EU Membership.

The current crisis plays a part,  but many blame the media.

Fleet Street is where British  journalistic tradition was born.

I was talking to a great American  investigative reporter the other day.

He said, 'What are newspapers for?  We're here to make trouble.'

The pen is mightier than the sword.  UK journalists have razor-sharp Bics.

I've been in Brussels for nine years.  I've been with The Telegraph for five.

I know the institutions well.  I can be very nerdy if I want to be.

British journalists  are much more aggressive,

That's what people think,  because we're not very deferential

to 'Monsieur le Président' or whoever it is.

The market calls for  this aggressive approach.

With 10 national newspapers  and many regional sheets competing,

The more popular tabloids have been  at the centre of many Euromyths.

The European Commission keeps a list  from the '90s.

Keeping correspondents abroad  is expensive.

The tabloids don't find that worthwhile  in Brussels,

Stringers want to sell stories,  so they exaggerate the story,

they twist it,  rightly from their point of view.

They build on a story, twist it,  exaggerate it,

pander, if you like, to the line  they think the editor will buy.

A bent banana is a lovely story if you're  a tabloid editor here. You can't miss it.

Not all the blame can be placed  on lazy journalism.

Covering environment, finance  and foreign policy can be demanding.

Maybe that's one of the reasons why  European affairs are covered so badly.

There are not many supermen  and superwomen around.

Knowing your EFSF from your CSDP  isn't as easy as ABC.

At summits journalists  often simplify matters.

We tend to do summits  as victory or defeat.

It's more interesting if we trail it  as a fight or a potential defeat on the way.

The latest EU summit was no exception  with one tabloid using a war reference.

News is not about reporting  what works well.

to keep a critical eye on an institution  that's growing in importance.

that you can find constant headlines,  whether good or bad, about Europe.

Oscar Wilde said, 'There is only one thing  in life worse than being talked about,