Login
close
Login is restricted to DCN Publisher Members. If you are a DCN Member and don't have an account, register here.
Search

Digital Content Next logo

Menu

Articles by: "Rande Price, Research VP – DCN"

Industry-Research

Audience trust: journalists vs independent creators

Journalism faces a significant challenge in maintaining trust as audiences increasingly turn to online content creators who produce work resembling traditional journalism. Although journalism remains a cornerstone of democracy, it now competes with creators who often build large and deeply engaged followings, which rival (or even surpass) established news outlets. A new report suggests that this trend is driven by the contrasting ways journalists and creators connect with their audiences.

In The Future of Trustworthy Information, Julia Angwin explores the shifting dynamics of trust in the digital age. Through her work at the Shorenstein Center, she is exploring the roles of content creators and how they compete with, and can inform the work of traditional journalists. In particular, she examines their relationships through the lens of who today’s audiences trust and why.

Building blocks of trustworthiness

Angwin adopts a trust framework from Roger C. Mayer’s 1995 “Integrative Model of Organizational Trust,” focusing on three key factors:

  1. Ability: Competence in performing a task.
  2. Benevolence: Motives that prioritize the audience’s best interests.
  3. Integrity: Adherence to principles that align with the audience’s values.

These elements are critical for both creators and journalists but manifest differently in their practices.

Demonstrating ability

Traditional journalism emphasizes expertise in reporting processes—verifying facts, cultivating sources, and concise writing—but often fails to make this expertise transparent to the public. Reporters rarely highlight their qualifications, and newsroom norms discourage reliance on personal expertise. Efforts to enhance trust, such as detailed reporter biographies, remain underutilized and ineffective.

In contrast, creators highlight their expertise directly. Many specialize in specific domains, such as doctors debunking medical misinformation or leather workers analyzing luxury handbags, and prominently feature their credentials. They tailor storytelling to build trust by guiding audiences through evidence before reaching conclusions. They also emphasize visual storytelling, as today’s audiences gravitate towards video-based content. The use of green screens capitalizes on this trend while reinforcing credibility by presenting data in real-time.

Perceived benevolence

Audiences increasingly question journalists’ benevolence, with only 23% of Americans believing national news organizations prioritize the public’s best interests. Skepticism stems from perceived political biases, sensationalism, and the profit motives of large media conglomerates. Individual journalists often struggle to overcome institutional distrust, especially when constrained by editorial policies.

Interestingly, audiences do not perceive creators as benevolent either. Particularly when it comes to product reviews, audiences are skeptical of trustworthiness. Creators counter this by positioning themselves as community servants. They frequently respond to audience requests and tailor content to viewer interests. Transparency about financial motives sets them apart; many creators decline brand partnerships or disclose them carefully, recognizing authenticity strengthens trust. This direct engagement fosters a perception of benevolence that journalists often lack.

Upholding integrity

Both journalists and creators navigate a low-trust digital environment where misinformation proliferates. Accusations of sensationalism or bias often undermine journalistic integrity, while creators address skepticism around product endorsements. To reinforce integrity, creators disclose sources, provide citations, and avoid overt monetization. Visual evidence and informal presentation styles humanize creators, enhancing their perceived honesty.

Implications for traditional journalism

The rise of content creators offers valuable lessons for journalism. Creators enter the digital space understanding that trust must be earned, not assumed. Their focus on transparency, responsiveness, and audience engagement contrasts with journalism’s historical reliance on legacy credibility. This gap underscores the need for journalists to adopt practices that tangibly demonstrate trustworthiness. These practices include showcasing expertise, engaging directly with audiences, and maintaining transparency about financial and editorial motivations.

Journalists must prioritize meaningful accountability to rebuild trust with the public. They often need more consequences for mistakes than creators, who face immediate audience scrutiny for errors. Engaging directly with affected communities and investing in public editors and reader feedback mechanisms can enhance transparency and foster trust. While resource constraints are real, addressing the trust deficit is essential to journalism’s core mission: holding power accountable. Small steps in this direction can help restore credibility and public confidence.

Industry-Research

The Tow Center reveals ChatGPT’s major attribution errors

OpenAI’s ChatGPT Search, an AI-driven alternative to traditional search engines, raises pressing concerns for news publishers, including attribution errors. OpenAI promotes its collaboration with select news organizations and uses mechanisms like robots.txt files to give publishers some control over their content, However, questions loom about its impact on journalism. These worries echo the backlash from two years ago when publishers discovered their content was used—without consent—to train OpenAI’s models.

OpenAI markets ChatGPT Search as a platform to enhance publisher reach. Yet, new research from the Tow Center for Digital Journalism, as reported in the Columbia Journalism Review, reveals significant issues with the tool’s ability to accurately attribute and represent content. This undermines trust between publishers who are working with OpenAI. It also represents a significant concern for publishers whose content is misattributed or misrepresented because of the risk of reputational damage. And, as such, it poses challenges for newsrooms adopting AI technologies.

Unreliable attribution and false confidence

The Tow Center analyzed ChatGPT Search using 200 traceable quotes from 20 publishers, including those with licensing agreements, those in litigation, and unaffiliated entities. Traditional search engines consistently surface the original articles in the top three results.

However, ChatGPT Search fails to correctly attribute 153 of the quotes. It fabricates citations, credits rewritten versions of articles or misattributes sources. Notably, in only seven cases, it admits being unable to locate the source, prioritizing plausible but incorrect answers over transparency.

Unlike traditional search engines that clearly indicate when no match is found, ChatGPT’s confident delivery of inaccurate citations risks misleading users and damaging the credibility of referenced publishers. The findings of these ChatGPT search errors emphasize the risks of integrating AI-driven search tools into journalism amid ongoing struggles with content protection.

Accurate attribution is critical for news organizations to maintain trust, brand value, and loyalty. However, ChatGPT Search frequently distances users from original sources by misidentifying premium publications or favoring syndicated or plagiarized versions.

For example, when identifying a New York Times quote, ChatGPT attributes it to a site that copied the article without credit. Such misrepresentation undermines intellectual property rights and rewards unethical practices. Similarly, it often cites syndicated versions of articles, such as attributing a Government Technology piece to MIT Technology Review, diluting the originating publisher’s visibility and impact.

These errors exacerbate publishers’ challenges with audience fragmentation and declining revenues. ChatGPT’s attribution flaws risk further eroding the vital connection between publishers and their readers.

Crawler policies and content control

In its marketing, OpenAI emphasizes its respect for publisher preferences via robots.txt files. However, the Tow Center’s findings suggest otherwise. Yet even those publishers that block OpenAI’s crawlers are not immune to misrepresentation. And those allowing crawler access saw little improvement in citation accuracy.

For instance, despite blocking OpenAI crawlers, the New York Times experienced content misattributions. Publications like The Atlantic and the New York Post, which have licensing agreements and permit crawler access, also faced frequent errors.

This inconsistency highlights publishers’ limited control over how ChatGPT Search represents their content. Blocking crawlers does not guarantee protection, and opting in does not ensure better outcomes.

Transparency, trust and revenue impact of ChatGPT errors

A core problem with ChatGPT Search lies in its lack of transparency. When it cannot access or verify a source, the AI often forms plausible but inaccurate responses. Thus, it leaves users unable to discern reliability.

Unlike traditional search engines, which clearly signal when no results match a query, ChatGPT usually fails to communicate uncertainty. This opacity risks misleading users and eroding trust in both the platform and the referenced publishers.

The rapid adoption of AI-driven tools like ChatGPT Search poses significant challenges for publishers. With an estimated 15 million U.S. users starting their searches on AI platforms, the potential disruption to search-driven traffic is profound. Publishers reliant on visibility for subscriptions, advertising, or membership revenue face growing threats. If readers cannot reliably trace content to its source, publishers lose critical opportunities for engagement and monetization.

What needs to change

To foster a sustainable relationship with newsrooms, Tow’s research recommends that OpenAI must address these challenges:

  1. Commit to transparent attribution: ChatGPT must accurately cite original sources or explicitly indicate when an answer cannot be provided.
  2. Establish universal standards: OpenAI should adopt industry-wide protocols prioritizing canonical sources.
  3. Increase accountability: To address systemic issues, meaningful partnerships with newsrooms—beyond select licensing deals—are essential.
  4. Enable publisher control: Tools empowering publishers to dictate content access and representation will signal good faith.

ChatGPT Search’s flaws underscore the tensions between generative AI platforms and the news industry. While OpenAI claims to collaborate with publishers, its inconsistent handling of content undermines trust and fails to protect intellectual property.

As generative AI reshapes the future of search, publishers must advocate for stronger safeguards and fairer partnerships to ensure their work is accurately represented and valued. By addressing these issues, AI platforms and newsrooms can build a foundation for mutual benefit—and one that that will ultimately benefit consumers as well.

Industry-Research

Influencers take on the news

News influencers are transforming how people consume information on social media, emerging as a key force in the digital landscape. This new breed of news influencers are defined as having at least 100,000 followers on platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X (formerly Twitter), and YouTube and who frequently post about news topics. Most news influencers operate independently, with over three-quarters (77%) having no current or prior affiliation with a news organization. They combine personal branding with the dissemination of information, carving out a space that blends elements of journalism and entertainment with questionable accuracy.

A recent Pew Research Center study, America’s News Influencers, finds that roughly one in five U.S. adults regularly gets news from influencers. Younger audiences—particularly those aged 18 to 29—are even more likely to do so. Among this age group, 37% rely on influencers for updates on current events.

News influencers reach their audiences through multiple platforms, with X currently leading the way. About 85% of Pew’s sampled influencers are active on X, followed by Instagram (50%) and YouTube (44%). Many adopt a cross-platform strategy, with some maintaining a presence on five or more sites. While these news influencers skew largely male, TikTok stands out for its relatively balanced gender representation among influencers.

Diverse content and political landscape

Americans who follow news influencers encounter diverse content, including factual updates (90%), opinions (87%), humor (87%), and breaking news (83%). Among those consuming opinions, 61% report seeing a mix of views they agree and disagree with, while 30% say they mostly encounter opinions they agree with. Only 2% see information with which they mostly disagree.

Influencers cover equally wide-ranging topics, though politics and government dominate their content. However, this focus reflects the study’s fielding period—July 15 to August 4, 2024. During this time, significant events included the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, the first assassination attempt on Donald Trump, and President Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the presidential race. While U.S. politics takes center stage, influencers also address social issues such as race, LGBTQ+ rights, and abortion, along with international events.

Despite their prominence, news influencers present a complex picture regarding political orientation. Slightly more influencers identify as right-leaning (27%) than left-leaning (21%), though half remain politically neutral. TikTok stands out as the only platform where left-leaning influencers outnumber right-leaning ones.

Audiences value news influencers’ perspectives

Audiences perceive news influencers as offering distinct and valuable perspectives. Most followers believe these influencers help them better understand current events. Among those who rely on influencers for news, 65% say they enhance their understanding of current events and civic issues, while only 9% feel more confused. Another 26% say influencers make little difference in their comprehension.

When comparing news from influencers to other sources, 70% find it at least somewhat different. About 23% describe it as extremely or very different, while 29% see little to no difference.

News influencers with and without industry experience differ

News influencers with and without news media industry experience differ notably in their public personas. Those tied to news organizations are less likely to express political leanings; 64% avoid clear political orientation, compared to 44% of non-industry influencers. Although similar proportions identify as right-leaning (25% vs. 27%), just 9% of industry-tied influencers identify as left-leaning, compared to 25% of non-industry influencers.

Non-industry influencers are also more likely to connect their profiles to specific values or identities, with 22% doing so versus just 2% of industry-tied influencers. For instance, 8% of non-industry influencers support LGBTQ+ rights or identify as LGBTQ+, while none with industry experience express such views.

This research highlights the growing impact of news influencers in the modern information ecosystem. Operating largely outside traditional media structures, they offer audiences a mix of facts, opinions, and entertainment. While their rise enables more personalized and diverse information consumption, it raises important questions about accuracy, accountability, and the evolving role of professional journalism in a landscape increasingly dominated by independent digital voices.

Industry-Research

AI can produce content. But can it tell a good story?

Generative AI enables the production of content at scale. It has been found to generate narratives with essential elements like concrete characters, logical plot development, and coherence, which are all key to the story quality. Narratives play a vital role in conveying culture, enforcing norms, and sharing knowledge. But what happens to authenticity, emotion, and persuasive power in AI-generated stories?

A recent report by Haoran Chu and Sixiao Liu, Can AI Tell Good Stories?, examines AI’s potential to craft narratives that engage audiences and influence beliefs and behaviors. Through a new three-part series of studies, these researchers build on studies highlighting tools like ChatGPT, which show promise for AI-driven storytelling. However, they emphasize that impactful storytelling relies on authenticity, which goes beyond factual accuracy. Chu and Liu question ChatGPT’s ability to evoke narrative immersion and persuasion, elements often anchored in human creativity and personal experience.

The researchers also investigate whether labeling a story as AI-generated affects reader engagement. Overall, the study examines AI’s potential to tell compelling stories and influence audiences and how AI-generated stories compare to traditional human storytelling.

Study 1: Can AI tell good stories?

In the first study, Chu and Liu explore the question, “Can AI tell good stories?” They examine whether AI-generated narratives can captivate and impact audiences as deeply as human-created ones. This study emphasizes AI’s technical abilities in crafting stories. The researchers program AI to create stories, from short fictional tales to complex, multi-layered narratives, and then analyze how these AI-generated stories affect people emotionally and intellectually.

The study finds that AI can adhere to structural storytelling elements like character development, conflict, and resolution. Yet, it often needs more depth of human experiences and emotions that make stories compelling. Despite this, AI-generated narratives sometimes capture audience interest and influence certain beliefs or attitudes. The study concludes that AI storytelling has limitations but is advancing quickly, with promising potential for more engaging narratives. The researchers suggest that enhancing AI’s emotional intelligence and contextual understanding could further improve its storytelling capabilities.

Study 2: The influence of AI-generated stories on beliefs and behavior

The second study goes beyond the question of AI’s ability to tell a good story to ask whether AI-generated stories can genuinely influence beliefs and behaviors. This research investigates whether AI-crafted stories can impact audiences as effectively as human-created ones. It focuses on the potential to shape opinions, foster empathy, or inspire actions.

In this study, participants read stories created by either humans or AI. The participants are unaware of the source of each story, allowing the researchers to assess the impact of the content without bias. They find that AI-generated stories could somewhat influence readers’ opinions and emotions, especially regarding straightforward or factual topics. However, human-created stories tend to have a more substantial and lasting effect on the audience for more nuanced or emotionally charged subjects.

The study suggests that while AI-generated stories have the potential to influence behavior, they often lack the subtlety and emotional complexity required to create deep, long-lasting connections. This limitation is likely because AI needs more personal experience and an understanding of human emotions, which can make its narratives feel less relatable or profound. Despite these limitations, the study notes that AI storytelling could still be useful in specific contexts, such as educational or informative storytelling.

Study 3: Comparing AI and human storytelling

The third study directly compares AI storytelling with human storytelling, examining their strengths and weaknesses. This study seeks to understand whether AI can tell a good story and where it falls short compared to human creativity. The researchers analyze the storytelling components, including character development, emotional appeal, and the ability to engage audiences.

The findings show that while AI excels at consistency and structure. However, it struggles with the abstract aspects of storytelling, such as creating realistic emotions and building complex character relationships. For example, AI can write a well-organized story with a clear beginning, middle, and end but often struggles with subtleties like irony, humor, or empathy.

On the other hand, human storytellers can draw from personal experiences and emotions to create stories that resonate more deeply. This is particularly important for genres that rely on empathy, like drama or romance, where the audience connects with the characters’ emotional journeys.

AI can create content. It can’t tell impactful stories (yet)

The study concludes that while AI might be useful for quickly producing structured content, it needs to improve its ability to replicate the depth of human storytelling. However, it also points out that AI can be a powerful tool when paired with human creativity. For instance, AI can generate story ideas, help with content organization, or even create drafts that human writers can refine and deepen.

These three studies provide a nuanced understanding of AI storytelling. The first study finds that AI has the structural capability to create stories but lacks the depth of human experiences. The second study shows that AI-generated stories can influence beliefs and behaviors but are less impactful than human stories for emotionally complex topics. The third study compares AI storytelling to human storytelling, showing that while AI is effective in structured storytelling, it struggles with emotional depth and complexity. Together, these studies suggest that AI storytelling is still most effective when complemented by human creativity and emotional insight.

Industry-Research | Policy

AI developers favor premium media content for training

As large language models (LLMs) evolve from experimental tools to valuable assets, transparency in their data sourcing is rapidly declining. Initially, datasets were openly shared, allowing the public to examine the content used for training. However, LLM companies tightly guard their data sources today, leading to new intellectual property (IP) conflicts. Many media companies are pursuing litigation to protect their content from unauthorized use in AI training. At the same time, courts, regulators, and policymakers are engaged in debates over content ownership and the responsibilities of large language model (LLM) developers.

A new report by George Wukoson, Ziff Davis’ lead AI attorney, and Joey Fortuna, the company’s chief technology officer, sheds light on the nature of data sources used by major LLMs. Their research reveals that AI developers often favor high-quality content when selecting training data, especially content owned by premium media companies. Their findings support discussions around publishers’ IP rights, content licensing, and the ethical dimensions of AI development.

Dataset analysis and key findings

Wukoson and Fortuna’s research uses Domain Authority (DA), a metric developed by Moz for search engine optimization, to measure the prominence of domains in several LLM training datasets. They examine Common Crawl, C4, OpenWebText, and OpenWebText2, and analyze how curation levels affect the inclusion of content from high-DA, premium sources.

Their findings showed that as datasets become more curated, the share of content from high-quality publishers rises significantly. Key findings from the research:

1. Increasing inclusion of premium content

In less curated datasets like Common Crawl, content from major media companies only makes up about 0.44%. However, in OpenWebText2, a highly curated dataset, content from these companies jumps to 12.04%. This shift indicates that LLM developers selectively incorporate reputable sources to improve the quality and accuracy of the model’s output.

2. Higher DA correlates with higher curation levels

    Common Crawl, an uncurated dataset, has over 50% of domains with DA scores below 10, indicating that it includes a significant amount of low-authority content. In contrast, OpenWebText2 comprises 39.4% of domains with DA scores between 90 and 100, reflecting a preference for high-authority, reliable sources as datasets undergo curation.

    3. Prominence of premium content

      Leading publishers like The New York Times and News Corp consistently appear in the top DA range (90–100), reflecting their high authority in the dataset rankings. Their dominance in these datasets suggests that LLMs are more frequently training on established news and media sources. This gives these outlets a stronger influence in shaping model behavior and responses.

      These trends show a pattern where the curation of training datasets systematically filters out lower-quality sources, favoring reputable, high-DA domains. As a result, LLMs benefit from exposure to high-quality, well-sourced content, which may enhance their performance but raise concerns about IP use and representation.

      Prioritizing high-quality, high-DA content in LLM datasets escalates legal disputes between media companies and AI firms. For example, the New York Times has filed a copyright infringement suit against major AI developers. They argue that these AI companies profit from high-quality content without appropriate compensation to the original publishers.

      As LLMs continue transforming industries, the value of high-quality, curated content becomes increasingly apparent. The authors’ analysis shows that curation prioritizes content from high-DA, reputable media content companies, amplifying their role in shaping model outcomes. This trend will likely intensify as LLM companies refine their training methodologies, sparking further debate over intellectual property and AI firms’ financial obligations to content creators. The findings here call for a broader dialogue around data licensing and compensation frameworks that reflect the mutual value between content creators and AI innovators.

      Industry-Research | Video

      In a fragmented video landscape, viewers start online

      Today’s vast television ecosystem combines streaming services, traditional pay-TV, and free ad-supported platforms, reflecting a sea change in how viewers find and consume video content. The scales are tipping in favor of online sources their first stop when seeking out video content. Over two-thirds (67%) of respondents report they turn to an online source first when they want to watch TV. Only 26% default to a traditional MVPD (Multichannel Video Programming Distributor) set-top box. Hub Entertainment Research’s new report, Decoding the Default, highlights an increasingly fragmented ecosystem where viewers lean more toward online platforms than ever.

      From traditional TV to streaming

      As cord-cutting and “cord-never” populations continue to grow, the number of viewers who rely solely on traditional pay-TV services is dwindling. According to Hub’s findings, more than twice as many viewers use both traditional pay-TV and streaming platforms rather than just one type. Audiences find that streaming platforms offer more options and flexibility than traditional TV. Deloitte’s Digital Media Trends report echoes this, noting that many consumers find streaming services more aligned with their viewing needs. They prioritize content that matches their schedules rather than set broadcast times.

      Viewers’ SVOD stack

      Viewers’ video-on-demand (SVOD) “stacks” are getting larger, with many people subscribing to at least three different services. The report shows that the percentage of consumers using three or more SVODs more than doubled since 2020, illustrating the growth of multi-platform use. This expansion is partially due to the massive libraries each SVOD offers; for instance, Netflix, Hulu, and Disney+ have extensive catalogs covering different genres and audience segments.

      Yet, while viewers may stack multiple services, only a few platforms become their “default.” Netflix leads this default category, with 26% of respondents choosing it first. This trend toward Netflix as the initial go-to aligns with its status as a pioneering platform with an established reputation for both quantity and quality of content. Hulu and Amazon Prime Video follow while Disney+ and Max (formerly HBO Max) fall slightly behind.

      Online streaming is the new “home base”

      Hub’s findings underscore that, for most viewers, the default experience of “turning on the TV” starts with online streaming. About one-third of viewers say they now go directly to a built-in smart TV app, showing a 50% increase in usage since 2021.

      The appeal of smart TV apps lies in their convenience. They provide immediate access to various streaming platforms without additional hardware. The transition to smart TV apps represents a natural evolution of how viewers experience TV.

      Research from the Leichtman Research aligns with this trend, finding that 87% of U.S. households own a device connecting their TV to the internet, from smart TVs to streaming media players. This widespread connectivity facilitates using apps like Netflix, Hulu, and Prime Video, solidifying them as the primary sources of TV content.

      SVOD loyalty driven by “favorite shows”

      Hub’s report highlights a crucial driver of platform loyalty—exclusive content. When viewers have a specific favorite show exclusive to a particular SVOD, they’re more likely to remain loyal to that platform. This “stickiness” effect is essential in a crowded market where content variety can make or break viewer retention.

      On the other hand, traditional MVPDs still hold an edge on live TV, particularly for sports and news. These content categories remain strongholds for pay-TV providers, appealing to a demographic that values real-time events. However, this loyalty is eroding. The report notes that nearly a quarter of MVPD users would consider canceling their service if forced to choose between platforms.

      The growth of FAST

      FAST services are also becoming a mainstay for many viewers, especially those who prioritize content variety over exclusivity. FAST platforms appeal to cost-conscious consumers who prefer a broad selection of programming without additional monthly costs. Their rise complements subscription streaming by offering a fallback for when paid services are unavailable or too costly.

      FAST providers such as Pluto TV and Tubi are gaining traction as they offer a unique blend of on-demand and live content with a more traditional TV-like feel. According to a survey from eMarketer, over half of U.S. adults now use FAST services. For these viewers, the trade-off of ads in exchange for free content is more appealing than paying for an additional SVOD, further underscoring the complexity of the modern TV ecosystem.

      Will MVPDs adapt?

      The rapid decline of MVPD set-top boxes poses an existential challenge to pay-TV providers, who now face pressure to innovate or risk further market loss. Some MVPDs are pivoting to streaming bundles or hybrid solutions to capture traditional and digital audiences. However, Hub’s report suggests these changes may be too late. As smart TV apps and streaming services become the “default” choice for viewing, MVPDs could be relegated to a niche role unless they compete with streaming platforms on convenience, affordability, and exclusive content.

      As more people rely on streaming services and smart TVs, the influence of traditional MVPDs is waning. Netflix’s leading SVOD “default” position reflects its early mover advantage and vast content library. Meanwhile, traditional TV’s staples—live news and sports—feel less essential as viewers increasingly favor on-demand content.

      Industry-Research

      It’s time to connect journalism research with media professionals

      A great deal of research on journalism and the news and media industry is being undertaken by academics. However, most journalists have limited exposure to this work and few academics undertake their research directly with journalists. This has created a gap between the study of journalism and the practice of journalism. In the challenging economic climate for the media, the industry could certainly benefit from increased knowledge on how journalism should be practiced and produced today.

      Bridging the divide between journalism research and practice requires understanding both fields’ unique challenges. Journalism research uncovers critical insights into news coverage. For example: how it can reinforce racial stereotypes, misrepresent facts on climate change, or build public trust through transparency. Research alone cannot solve these issues. However, it offers evidence-based support to news organizations, providing a better foundation than relying on tradition or instinct. The American Press Institute and Journalism Bridging Project’s new white paper, The Research-Practice Gap in Journalism, explores this issue in the U.S. and suggests strategies on how to bridge it.

      Identifying barriers between researchers and media professionals

      Academic findings rarely reach journalists in ways that encourage actionable change. This is largely because the priorities of academia and the news industry differ. This disconnect leads to tensions as journalists see researchers detached from newsroom realities. Academic journals do not typically prioritize practical applications. Findings are also often locked behind expensive paywalls, making them inaccessible to journalists.

      The slow pace of academic publishing further complicates things, with research often needing to be updated by the time it becomes available. Despite these challenges, efforts are underway to bridge the gap. Some researchers are collaborating with newsrooms to help journalists adopt audience engagement strategies, and institutions like the Center for Media Engagement are working to make research publicly accessible.

      Understanding the divide between journalism research and practice is key to addressing it. Both fields are committed to supporting democracy through a strong, independent press, but their incentive structures differ greatly. Newsrooms need research that addresses immediate challenges, such as rebuilding public trust or sustaining business models. Academia, meanwhile, values long-term exploration of theoretical issues, which can lead to research that feels disconnected from journalism’s day-to-day needs.

      Bridging the gap between journalism research and journalists

      Connecting journalism research with practice is a complex challenge, but conversations with journalists and academics reveal several strategies to address this divide. Some initiatives can be implemented more easily at the smaller end of the spectrum. For instance, better engagement between newsrooms and researchers could begin with simple outreach efforts. Journalists can inform scholars about their ongoing projects, and researchers can take the initiative to translate their findings into accessible, practical language for journalists.

      The report suggests that conferences also provide a platform for bridging this gap. While journalists and researchers attend conferences, they often participate in different ones. Encouraging both groups to attend interdisciplinary events like South by Southwest or practitioner-focused gatherings like the Online News Association could foster meaningful connections. Panels that mix scholars and practitioners, as well as workshops and networking opportunities, offer fertile ground for collaboration.

      Another key idea is producing different research outputs for different audiences. For example, the Center for Innovation and Sustainability in Local Media produces traditional research and more journalistic pieces highlighting real-world stories. This dual-output approach can help researchers make an impact more quickly, ensuring their findings are accessible to journalists before the news cycle moves on.

      The academic connection to real world journalism

      Solution-oriented research, such as case studies highlighting successful strategies used by news organizations, can also provide models for others to follow and inspire confidence in the practical application of academic work. The academic structure itself should encourage practical, real-world research. Tenure and promotion policies should reflect the value of public scholarship and engagement with newsrooms, focus more on practical implications, and make research sections, such as recommendations, open access to ensure they reach a wider audience.

      Journalism education also plays a critical role. Journalism schools can better integrate research skills with practical training, helping students understand how to apply evidence-based insights to real-world reporting.

      Funding is also essential to support initiatives like these. Independent funding allows researchers to prioritize mutual goals in their partnerships with newsrooms, while newsrooms receive compensation for the time they invest in collaborating with researchers.

      Closing this divide requires better communication, stronger relationships, and more accessible research. Journalism support organizations, funders, universities, and newsrooms must work together to bridge the gap, improving the quality of journalism and supporting informed decision-making. With greater collaboration and shared commitment, journalism research and practice can overcome their divide, benefiting the news industry and the public it serves.

      Industry-Research

      Journalists are burning out. Media leaders can help

      High stakes, constant deadlines, and unrelenting pressure are among the qualities that have long defined journalism. The economic pressures faced by the industry have intensified these issues. Unfortunately, burnout is a pressing issue among journalists that affects the industry as a whole. This year alone, more than half of journalists report they think of quitting due to burnout. Alarmingly, 40% of journalists report leaving their previous job because of burnout, underscoring how deeply it affects retention. Muck Rack surveyed nearly 1,800 journalists about their stress levels, burnout, vacation habits, and salary to explore how journalists navigate this career path. The report offers an eye-opening glimpse into the realities of the profession and highlights the challenges journalists face. It also explores potential pathways media companies can take to help create a better balance.

      High-stress levels, workload, and the “always-on” dilemma

      Journalists report some of the highest stress levels among professionals. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most stressful, most journalists rated themselves at a 7. Only 20% of respondents described their stress levels below the midpoint, while 67% placed them above it. Several factors drive persistent tension, including a demanding workload and inadequate pay. They also emphasized the impact of modern media’s pervasive “always-on” culture. In other words, primary stressors contributing to burnout are overwhelming workloads, insufficient salaries, and the expectation of constant availability.

      The workload for journalists is a significant contributor to their stress. The data reveals that most journalists work on more than four stories simultaneously, with a considerable number handling seven or more projects at once. Managing multiple stories demands high levels of organization and focus, leaving little room for rest or downtime.

      The expectation of being “always on” compounds stress levels. Ninety-six percent of journalists report difficulty switching off after work, and about 64% work more than 40 hours weekly. Of these, 13% work over 51 hours weekly. Even when journalists aren’t officially on the clock, the nature of the job often pulls them back in—80% of journalists work outside regular business hours at least once a week.

      With heavy workloads and constant pressure, it’s no surprise that many journalists find it difficult to take time off. The most common reasons for skipping vacations include overwhelming workloads, staffing shortages, and the expectation to remain connected.

      Even when journalists manage to schedule vacation time, their ability to disconnect is limited. Nearly 70% of respondents said their vacations were interrupted by work. Fewer than one in three say they are able to keep work completely at bay while on paid time off (PTO).

      Work environment

      The working environment can significantly impact stress levels and overall work-life balance. Journalists are fairly split in their preferences for work arrangements, with many seeking hybrid or fully remote options. Over half of respondents reported that their current work setup positively contributes to their work-life balance. However, a considerable number expressed dissatisfaction with their current arrangements, indicating that improvements in flexibility could help ease stress.

      Mental health is another critical aspect of balancing a demanding career with personal well-being. However, fewer than a quarter of journalists have access to mental health services at work. This lack of support is concerning, especially considering the field’s high-stress levels and burnout. While about half of the journalists we surveyed believe they would receive support from their coworkers during mental health struggles, only 42% expect the same from workplace leadership.

      The salary gap

      The financial realities of journalism also weigh heavily on the work-life balance of professionals. The typical salary for journalists is $67,000, though this figure varies significantly between freelancers and full-time staff. Freelancers, on average, earn $60,000, while non-freelancers earn about $70,000. Over a quarter of freelancers earn less than $40,000 annually, while none earn more than $250,000.

      Journalists are the heart of the media business. Without their work, there is no content, no news, and, ultimately, no business model to sustain the industry. They generate stories that inform, educate, and engage audiences, providing the core product that media companies rely on. Yet, despite their essential role, journalists face mounting challenges threatening their ability to continue in the profession. The high stress, relentless deadlines, and mental health strains highlighted in this report are not just personal issues but systemic ones that risk undermining the very foundation of the media industry. If journalists cannot balance their workloads and personal well-being, the ripple effects will inevitably impact content quality and the media business’s sustainability.

      To effectively support journalists and safeguard their well-being, media organizations must prioritize the establishment of clear boundaries for after-hours work. They should also create dedicated “focus hours” that are free from unnecessary disruptions. Encouraging uninterrupted paid time off (PTO) is equally crucial, allowing journalists to fully  recharge without the looming pressure of work.

      Beyond these structural changes, fostering a culture rooted in empathy, open communication, and peer support can cultivate a healthier, more collaborative environment. By embracing these strategies, media companies will lessen the possibility of burnout. They will also help also ensure that journalists remain resilient, creative, and engage, which will help preserving the integrity and sustainability of the industry.

      Industry-Research | Video

      Podcasting reshapes audience engagement and brand connections

      The evolution of the podcast industry is nothing short of remarkable. Once a niche hobby, podcasting has become a mainstay format in the media landscape, driving entertainment, engagement, and brand connection. Creators are critical to this thriving ecosystem, crafting compelling stories that have done nothing less than revolutionize modern media. The Podcast Trends Report delves into five significant trends in the podcasting world, all viewed through the lens of the creators, which highlights opportunities in this dynamic medium.

      Many creators are capitalizing on the podcast opportunity. These creators aren’t just hosting shows; they’re cultivating networks of content that engage listeners across devices and formats. From true crime investigations to heartwarming advice, diverse topics have allowed podcasters to build dedicated fandoms who consume their content religiously. In fact, over half of podcast listeners say they can’t get enough of their favorite shows. To meet this insatiable demand, creators are expanding into new formats like video podcasts, giving audiences a multimedia experience that enhances traditional audio storytelling.

      For creators, this expansion means more than just increased visibility. It’s about crafting a holistic entertainment ecosystem that keeps listeners engaged across multiple platforms, allowing for a deeper connection between creators and their audiences. Networks like Team Coco, led by Conan O’Brien, have leveraged their star power to expand into YouTube, video sponsorships, and social media campaigns, proving that podcasts are more than just a “side gig”—they’re the center of today’s media universe.

      A media mainstay

      Podcasts have evolved beyond being an optional addition to media plans. They effectively drive full-funnel results, provide incremental reach, and create real brand impact. With advancements in advertising technology, brands are tapping into the power of podcasts more than ever. The reach of podcasts extends far beyond audio, with over 13 million monthly listeners consuming audio and video content. This cross-format potential has positioned podcasts as a vital tool in modern media strategies.

      Brands like Kia have recognized this potential, utilizing podcasts in campaigns across multiple platforms, from host-read ads on popular shows to video content on YouTube and social media. Such campaigns demonstrate the versatility of podcasts and their ability to serve as a dynamic, multi-channel touchpoint for brands seeking to reach an engaged, loyal audience.

      Growth of video podcasts

      While audio remains the core of podcasting, video podcasts are quickly gaining momentum. For creators, video presents an opportunity to expand their content’s reach, tapping into audiences on platforms like YouTube. For advertisers, video podcasts offer a new avenue for creative ad placements incorporating visuals, making capturing attention and driving engagement easier. The growth of video podcasts is still in its early stages, but the upside is clear: fans are willing to follow their favorite shows across mediums, and brands that embrace this format stand to gain.

      Creators who pivot into video extend their brand’s footprint and foster deeper connections with their audience. Video enables fans to engage with the content in a new, more immersive way, blending the intimacy of audio with the visual appeal that drives platforms like YouTube. This format is becoming a vital pillar of the podcasting world, creating fresh opportunities for brands and creators alike.

      Bridging cultural gaps

      One of podcasting’s greatest strengths is its ability to bridge cultural gaps. Listeners come to podcasts seeking authentic voices and real conversations that resonate with their identities and experiences. According to our data, 58% of multicultural podcast listeners say podcasts allow them to hear from diverse creators, and nearly 30% are more likely to tune in to connect with their culture or community.

      Investing in diverse creators allows advertisers to reach new audiences and foster trust and loyalty. Brands that partner with podcasts focusing on culturally relevant topics or collaborate with creators from diverse backgrounds are well-positioned to make a lasting impact. For instance, our “Diverse Voices” collection provides a platform for underrepresented podcasters, offering brands a way to tap into this growing market.

      Binge-worthy content becomes a podcasting trend

      Binge culture is dominating TV and streaming platforms and is now becoming a podcasting trend. Creators are releasing seasonal drops and limited series to encourage listeners to consume multiple episodes back-to-back. This trend is transforming how podcast content is structured and consumed. Nearly two-thirds of podcast listeners report bingeing multiple episodes in a single session, indicating that podcasting adapts to audience preferences for serialized, binge-able content.

      This format also presents exciting opportunities for brands. Seasonal podcasts or limited series allow for continuous engagement, with brands sponsoring entire seasons or crafting storylines that extend across multiple episodes. This gives listeners a richer, more integrated experience while amplifying brand visibility.

      Creators will fuel the future of podcasting with their creativity and passion. From expanding into video to telling binge-worthy stories, podcasters are breaking new ground and opening new opportunities for brands and audiences. As the medium continues to grow and evolve, brands that invest in podcasts—and the diverse voices behind them—will be well-positioned to tap into one of the younger audiences.

      Industry-Research

      Newsrooms should consider collaborating with content creators

      The shifting dynamics of the digital news industry are reshaping how outlets connect with audiences, and the definition of “journalist” is changing. Influencers on platforms like TikTok and YouTube successfully engage audiences in ways that traditional newsrooms sometimes struggle to achieve. As media consumption habits shift, the creator community offers a valuable vehicle for traditional news organizations.

      By collaborating with influential creators, news outlets can access new, often younger, audiences they might overlook. Evolving its newsroom strategies, the Baltimore Banner surpassed subscription goals and expanded its newsroom to 80 staff members. Similarly, the 133-year-old Seattle Times reached record circulation levels, reflecting a broader trend of local and nonprofit outlets successfully adapting to new challenges.

      The Poynter Institute’s new report highlights these trends. It identifies how the journalism industry increasingly relies on innovative strategies to adapt, with content creators and influencers playing a critical role in this transformation. While traditional news organizations face ongoing disruptions, this report shows that the demand for credible news remains strong.

      Evolving newsroom

      Poynter sees the rise of digital content creators, influencers, and the “creator economy” as an opportunity to redefine journalism. Rather than viewing them as purely competition for attention, traditional news organizations can collaborate with a new generation of content creators who bring fresh perspectives and innovative formats.

      Social media influencers often cover viral stories, reaching those who get their news primarily from platforms like TikTok or Instagram Reels. Working with content creators can help newsrooms diversify their storytelling formats and engage with younger, digitally savvy audiences. Journalists and creators both serve essential roles in the evolving news ecosystem.

      Engaging audiences with news fatigue

      Audiences face news fatigue. Wars, political instability, climate change, and economic uncertainty contribute to this exhaustion. However, it’s essential to recognize that news fatigue does not equate to a lack of interest in journalism. On the contrary, data from the Pew Research Center shows that news consumption remains steady, with audiences following major events like the 2024 elections more closely than in previous years.

      News organizations must present these topics in ways that resonate with audiences. Context, relevance, and credibility are key to engaging readers and viewers. This is where the rise of the creator economy becomes highly useful. Content creators, with their ability to present news in relatable and entertaining formats, play a unique role in combating news fatigue.

      Audiences today are fragmented, consuming information from various platforms and influencers. Journalists and content creators can embrace this reality by delivering tailored, high-quality stories serving distinct audiences. Poynter recommends that rather than diluting content out of fear that audiences will turn away, the focus should be on creating stories that provide context and actionable insights.

      Newsrooms must innovate and adapt

      Despite ongoing challenges in the news industry, organizations are finding ways to adapt. Collaboration between traditional journalists and digital content creators is key in this evolving landscape, each bringing distinct strengths. The Poynter report highlights the growing influence of creators and influencers in news delivery and building trust with younger audiences. It also explores how they are reshaping the broader media ecosystem.

      As the industry transforms, one constant remains: high-quality journalism—whether produced by a traditional newsroom or a smartphone-wielding influencer—retains its crucial role in society. Together, these forces reshape how people consume and trust news. This partnership will shape journalism’s future, ensuring that reliable information reaches audiences in a digital-first world.

      Industry-Research | Video

      Ad-supported options drive SVOD sign-ups

      According to Samba TV’s new report on viewership for the first half of 2024, over-the-top (OTT) consumption grew by 40% year-over-year, highlighting the rising demand for on-demand content.  However, as audiences shift from linear TV, offering streaming video-on-demand (SVOD), ad-supported options are increasingly vital for capturing and retaining viewers.

      Meanwhile, linear TV continues its decline, with a 1% drop in year-over-year consumption and a 2% decrease in average daily reach. As the traditional linear TV audience ages, OTT services are starting to dominate the market. And, as the options and pricing models for SVOD proliferate, streamers are experimenting with a number of marketing methods to stand out.

      Growth of ad-supported streaming and FAST channels

      During the first six months of 2024, more than half of new SVOD sign-ups were driven by ad-supported options, indicating that consumers are increasingly willing to watch ads in exchange for lower subscription fees. Further, 33% of U.S. streamers now watch content on FAST channels. For advertisers, this shift presents ample opportunities to reach cord-cutters and engage with audiences in a more targeted manner.

      As competition intensifies among streaming platforms, effective marketing is becoming more crucial than ever. Many streamers are ramping up their advertising efforts in response, with billions of promotional campaign impressions across linear and OTT channels. Paramount+ and Warner Bros. Discovery’s Max leverage their built-in linear presences to boost visibility.

      Churn challenges

      Churn is a relevant concern despite the consistent addition of subscribers to SVOD platforms. Samba TV cites Antenna data showing that the number of cancellations is rising to the point where the net additions dropped by over 3 million year-over-year. This high churn reflects a broader trend of “subscription cycling,” where users frequently switch between services to access specific content.

      While nearly every household in the U.S. streams content, 44% watch only one or two platforms within six months. This highlights the challenge for streamers: keeping viewers engaged long enough to deter them from canceling their subscriptions. Streamers must optimize their release schedules, promote loyalty through bundling, and emphasize innovative content, such as live events, to combat churn. Importantly, content remains the primary driver behind subscription cycling, as viewers often return to previously abandoned platforms for highly anticipated new shows.

      Streamers increasingly leverage bundling, which provides added value to subscribers. The report notes additional Antenna data revealing that users who subscribe to bundles like the Disney Bundle and Apple One (bundles up to six Apple subscriptions for one lower monthly price) are less likely to cancel their subscriptions than those subscribed to individual services. For example, Apple TV+ had a churn rate of just under 9% in March 2024, while Apple One’s churn rate was less than 4%.

      Promoting content across a bundled portfolio helps reduce the risk of audiences churning after finishing a single show. Offering diverse content across multiple services can help prevent subscribers from canceling their subscriptions.

      Viewer preferences for SVOD

      Viewer preferences continue to evolve in the streaming era, with binge-watching becoming increasingly common. Data from Samba TV shows that audiences are more likely to binge-watch docuseries and crime shows when given the option. These genres drive binge rates by over 60%. In contrast, data shows that comedies and dramas are less likely to be binged.

      Interestingly, binge-watching is more prevalent among diverse households and in warmer climates. Cities like Houston, Orlando, and Phoenix show higher binge rates than cooler coastal regions. Additionally, Black and Hispanic households exhibit a stronger tendency to binge-watch than white or Asian households.

      Linear TV continues to serve a niche audience, particularly for live sports and news, but the growing preference for streaming platforms is undeniable. SVOD platforms, including those with ad-supported models, that effectively engage viewers by offering compelling content and value through strategic bundling are well-positioned to lead the rapidly evolving TV industry.

      Research | Video

      Consumers favor ad supported streaming

      The resurgence of ad-supported TV is a notable trend in the streaming business, and advertising is a central feature of the viewing experience. As streaming services multiply and subscription costs rise, consumers are increasingly opting for ad-supported alternatives. Hub Entertainment Research’s latest findings show that two-thirds of TV viewers prefer watching ads if it saves on subscription costs. This represents an eight-point increase over the past three years, indicating a significant shift in consumer preference. Hub’s study explores this attitude shift and how viewers perceive and interact with ads across different platforms.

      Normalization of ad-supported TV

      Economic pressures and budget constraints push viewers to seek more affordable entertainment options. Hub’s findings show that the percentage of consumers who express an aversion to ads fell from 17% three years ago to just 12% in June 2024. This decline in ad intolerance suggests that viewers are becoming more open to advertisements to reduce their overall entertainment expenses.

      While viewers are becoming more accepting of ads, the presentation of the ads plays a crucial role in the quality of their overall viewing experience. Hub’s study underscores that the ad experience significantly impacts viewer satisfaction and engagement. The number and length of ad breaks influence how reasonable viewers find the ad experience.

      Ad-supported video-on-demand (AVOD) platforms offer lighter ad loads and a more favorable overall ad experience than free ad-supported streaming TV (FAST) services and traditional multichannel subscriptions. Nearly eight in 10 viewers agree that there are “big differences” in the amount of advertising presented on competing TV services. This perception highlights the importance of managing ad loads to enhance viewer satisfaction.

      Amazon prime video’s impact on the ad landscape

      The introduction of ads on Amazon Prime Video has had a notable impact on the streaming landscape. Once a stronghold of ad-free content, Amazon Prime Video now includes ads by default. This change significantly reduces the proportion of viewers using ad-free streaming services to just three in five households.

      Most Prime Video viewers now watch with ads. Only those who use Amazon as a hub for other subscriptions or consider Prime Video a primary benefit of their membership opt for the ad-free experience. This shift highlights ads’ growing acceptance among viewers and the influence of major streaming platforms in shaping consumer preferences.

      Role of content in attention to ads

      Interestingly, the type of content viewers watch also affects their attention to ads. Participatory genres like talk shows, game shows, competition series, and mystery programs keep viewers more engaged during ad breaks. Certain content types can be more conducive to maintaining viewer attention, even when interrupted by ads.

      Opportunities for growth in ad-supported offerings

      Despite the increasing acceptance of ad-supported streaming, there is still significant potential for growth in this area. The study reveals that many viewers remain unaware of ad-supported offerings on major streaming services such as Disney+, Paramount+, Max, and Discovery+. Additionally, a significant minority believe these services are strictly ad-free.

      This gap in awareness presents an opportunity for streaming platforms to educate consumers about their ad-supported tiers. Targeted marketing messages aimed at budget-conscious non-subscribers could help drive growth in these offerings. Providing viewers with more affordable options and expanding the reach of ad-supported streaming appears to be a win-win scenario.

      The report findings indicate a strong future for the streaming advertising marketplace. As consumers continue to embrace ad-supported streaming to save on subscription costs, the demand for well-executed ad experiences will grow. Streaming services offering reasonable ad loads and shorter breaks will likely see better viewer attention and engagement outcomes. Understanding and catering to viewer preferences is crucial as the streaming industry evolves.

      ©2024 Digital Content Next. All Rights Reserved.