This study examines the impact of broadsheet newspaper reporting of takeover offers and market abuse cases on the corporate governance quality of the UK listed companies involved. The study examined 111 takeover offers and 25 market abuse cases from 2001 to 2010. Corporate governance quality is assessed from the perspective of the board of directors using an original scoring methodology devised herein. The scoring methodology is founded upon principles of best practice set out in UK regulatory guidelines; the statutory responsibilities expected of boards of UK companies; and recommendations expressed in academic commentary and specialist reports on corporate governance. The level of newspaper reporting is measured using the archives of eight prominent UK broadsheet publications. The results of statistical analysis indicate a significant association between changes in corporate governance quality and newspaper reporting on takeover offers but not for market abuse cases. This study sheds insight into the role the broadsheet media plays in corporate governance and contributes to a growing strand of research on the capacity of the media to lower agency costs. Findings imply that the broadsheet newspaper media serves a potentially important function in facilitating the operation of the market for corporate control. Specifically, by reporting on companies’ vulnerability to takeover, the newspaper media can create reputational costs for target directors thereby encouraging governance improvements in target companies. This thesis adds to an extensive body of literature on corporate governance and the market for corporate control in the UK by identifying the newspaper media as a significant intermediary in the context of the London Stock Exchange. Findings suggest a need for enhanced shareholder monitoring of boards of targets of failed takeover offers; greater clarity in guidelines on best practice in corporate governance; and increased acknowledgement of the impact of the media on corporate governance at policy level.