September 9, 2024 marks the start of the antitrust trial United States v. Google. This follows closely on the heels of the landmark antitrust case in which S District Court Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google “is a monopolist and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.”.
In this antitrust case, Google is accused of illegally monopolizing the $700B+ digital advertising industry by virtue of owning the dominant service for advertisers buying ads, the dominant service for publishers selling ads and the dominant exchange where bids are awarded. As the evidence will show, Google has systematically abused its dominant position through acquisitions and anticompetitive behavior to protect its monopoly, suppress competition and maintain their unique ability to collect a treasure trove of data about consumers. As a result, Google exerts outsized control over where revenue flows with dire impacts on journalism. The Department of Justice is rightly seeking to break up this monopoly in order to increase competition and innovation for advertisers, publishers and consumers.
We’ve partnered with other industry organizations to create a site that offers a wide range of resources to provide background on the case itself as well as regular trial updates. We also created an informational video in an effort to provide clarity and transparency in the digital advertising marketplace (in support of the AMERICA Act), which illustrates and explain some of the complexities in the digital advertising ecosystem that will be central to this trial.
Hear insights about the trial, what’s at stake, and what possible outcomes look like from DCN CEO, Jason Kint:
As more and more media companies and brands hop into the podcasting space, they’re turning to tried-and-true tactics to launch new shows. But podcasts live within a unique ecosystem, and podcast listeners themselves have distinct habits when it comes to consuming audio content.
If you’re planning to launch a podcast, there are five key marketing and audience development strategies you need to be thinking of, according to Christy Mirabal, an independent podcast marketing executive. She’s spent more than a decade building audiences for audio power players like Sirius XM, Sony’s Global Podcast Division, Stitcher, and HarperAudio. Here, she shares her five tips for success in podcast marketing.
1. Get to know your listener
“You can’t really build a marketing strategy without first knowing who you are building your podcast for,” says Mirabal. “If I had a nickel for every time somebody was like, ‘Well, this podcast is for everybody,’ I’d be rich. Because that’s not true – you know, no movie is for everybody – and that’s true for podcasts, too.”
Many podcasts are hyper-focused on a topic, so they attract specific, niche audiences. And people who market audio content need to think about how to specifically connect with that niche.
“For example, if you’re making a music podcast that’s trying to reach someone in their mid-to-late ‘30s, you’re not gonna reach them on TikTok, But you might reach them at a music festival, right?” she says.
Connecting with your target audience way before launching — whether in person or through online surveys – will help a media company find out if the people they’d like to target would actually want to listen to the program they’re cooking up. Knowing why the listener wants to consume a podcast will then inform how it’s marketed when it comes time to launch.
2. Ask: What is your podcast’s end goal?
When setting key performance indicators (KPIs) for a podcast marketing plan, Mirabal recommends backing up and asking a key question: What is your company’s end goal with a podcast? That will “help establish your north star metrics,” she says.
A media company may launch a podcast with the hopes of monetizing a series through paid advertising. If that’s the case, the end goal is likely clear cut: Grow a scalable audience that’s attractive to advertisers.
“But for a lot of brands, that’s not necessarily the end goal,” Mirabal says. “Maybe they’re looking to extend their brand and get it in front of a different audience. Maybe it’s just somebody’s passion project — like someone in the c-suite really believes in something and they want to do a podcast to get the word out there. And so the KPIs that you develop, if you are making a passion project, that’s gonna be a completely different path and a different set of KPIs than if you’re trying to monetize your work.”
Setting clear goals as a team from the jump will help determine the answers to key questions: Should we have a paid marketing and audience acquisition budget? Should our strategy be focused on organic growth? Do we need to set an audience bar to sell to advertisers?
3. Bring your entire company on board
As you begin to plan your podcast’s launch date, it’s crucial to make sure there’s cross department collaboration within your organization to make sure the show’s roll out is a success.
“Map out all of your own channels where you might promote the podcast to your audience,” Mirabal says. “With bigger media companies, sometimes these channels can be very matrixed.”
Coordinate with the team who owns newsletters, those who run a site’s content operation, and the groups who steer social.
“Somebody who owns a newsletter channel might need completely different assets and different collateral than someone managing a homepage,” Mirabal says.
Bringing in the art department to work with each vertical is also key. Even though podcasting is often an audiomedium, launching and promoting a show requires engaging visual imagery.
When a potential listener is searching for a podcast to listen to, they’ll come across your show’s visual identity first.
“If you’re making a show about shoes, there are probably a decent number of podcasts that also have shoe content,” Mirabal says. “So if people search ‘shoe podcast,’ and your art is not jumping off the page, people are just not ‘gonna click on it, and you’re never going to get the chance for that listen to happen.”
4. Establish a multi-channel storytelling plan
When bringing on a podcast editorial team, it’s important to communicate early on that part of their role will be to capture content that will go beyond the podcast product itself.
If the creative team shepherding the podcast is not thinking about promotional assets while they’re conducting interviews or recordings, a marketing team may be at a loss months down the line when it comes time to launch.
“A producer would tell me about this amazing interview that they had six months ago,” Mirabal says. “And I’m like, ‘Did you get anything from it — did you get any images or did you get any video?’ And they’re like, ‘No.’ And I always ask why, because I could totally do something with that. If you’re not thinking about the promotional assets while you’re actually making the podcast, it’s such a missed opportunity for fun things that your marketing team can really utilize.”
Have your podcast production team meet with your marketing and social departments when they begin to create a new show. Ahead of interviews, reporting trips, or in-studio recordings, have the creative team share their editorial plans, and discuss what assets can be created for engaging behind-the-scenes content.
5. Work with platform partners
The vast majority of podcast listeners don’t consume content on a media company or brand’s website, They’re doing it through audio apps like Apple Podcasts or Spotify, or video-based social media platforms, like YouTube.
“So digital service providers — like the Apples and Spotifys of the world — it’s important to work with them because you are getting in front of an audience that’s already listening to podcasting,” Mirabal says. “They’re looking for something to listen to. You’ve got a captive audience and more importantly, you’re preaching to the choir — they’re already listening to podcasting. You don’t even have to talk ’em into the medium.”
Mirabal says it’s important to coordinate with audio platforms on your launch strategy because they can prominently feature your podcast to hungry listeners.
“It’s a very useful way to get in front of an audience that’s literally searching for what to listen to,” she says.
Coordinating with a platform should be done months before launch – they may require special visual assets to feature your show.
“Apple Podcasts, for example, they’re looking for something that is like on par with [the type of marketing] you would find on like the movies or TV side of the Apple ecosystem — they want it cinematic, they want it lush, they want it to really stand out on the page so it can call people to listen,” Mirabal says. “You can’t just have one asset like the show art to try and tell that story.”
Despite the challenges thrown at publishers by obfuscating metrics or deliverability changes, newsletters continue to grow in importance. Media companies increasingly use email newsletters as a key tool for maintaining relationships with audiences away from social media, finding new readers, building habits, and opening new revenue streams.
At The Publisher Newsletter Summit, publishers came together to share strategies, advice and case studies on everything from newsletter monetization to audience growth.
Here are some of the strategies that they shared:
1. Don’t be afraid to center personalities
The role of journalists with followings has grown more complicated than ever in recent years. One theme that emerged at the Summit from a number of the sessions was that – if managed right – individual members of your team can serve as an incredible audience-building tool.
Women’s membership and community publisher Black Ballad started a newsletter from founder Tobi Oredein as a way to create a bond with the reader, because people build connections with humans, not brands. “Social media is very noisy,” Oredein outlined. Given that Black Ballad has paywall, she finds that “there is a barrier with people who can’t afford a membership. The newsletter is free, so everyone that’s signed up with their email gets that newsletter every week. So it’s a way to create that personal relationship.”
Leaning into this has also opened up revenue opportunities, although Oredein said that she chooses partner organizations very carefully. A recent campaign with the Founder’s Letter newsletter saw Black Ballad work with Maltesers around maternal mental health as Oredein was about to give birth to her second child.
“I wrote this newsletter on letting go of the Superwoman complex as a mum, second time around,” she explained. “It all came together and the newsletter opened the partnership; we had an editorial video that went alongside the essay, and it just went nuts. People loved the partnership. We realized that my personal newsletter opens up partnerships. Now the newsletter stands alone as the most requested advertising channel and is the most popular source of revenue for Black Ballad.”
There are risks with building newsletter audiences around individual journalists, but these can be managed. It’s an issue UK news brand The Telegraph faced when a big-name writer for their political newsletter left, and the team had to decide what to do next.
“We’ve grown [the newsletter] substantially since then,” Head of Newsletters Maire Bonheim said, explaining that they gave another political journalist a chance to fully front the newsletter. “He’s in your inbox at exactly 1pm every day. He’s really passionate about it, and he gives it his own edge. People have built up a habit and a relationship with him.”
2. Prioritize newsletters for retention and conversion
Special interest publisher Immediate Media monetizes many of its brands like Good Food and Gardeners’ World through subscriptions. Head of CRM and Customer Retention Matt Nash sees newsletters as playing a vital role in their subscription strategy, especially for long-term relationships.
“One of the big reasons why we’re so focused on newsletters from a subscription capacity is that 25% of our app subscribers received or read a newsletter before going on to subscribe,” he said. “So on average, there’s about 18 months between someone registering on Good Food and then converting to an app subscriber.”
“We also find that conversion from trials – mainly we run free trials going into paid subscriptions on the app – is around 10 percentage points higher for people that have previously been on our newsletter base before converting to a subscription.”
Nash shared that they have a two-part email strategy for pre- and post-subscription. The first half is focused around getting eyes on the website, showcasing the product and the subscription offers. “Every newsletter we send is an opportunity for us to try and convert someone if they look like they’re likely to subscribe,” he explained.
Once someone has converted, the focus switches to the “core readership phase,” where newsletters are part of a multi-channel tech stack optimized to try and get existing users to continue their subscription. The publisher uses a range of personalization options, from content type to send frequency and time to hit the readers at just the right frequency for them.
3. Consider repackaging content for educational courses
A number of publishers offer newsletter “courses” with a clear start and end point as an alternative way of engaging audiences. As part of its newsletter strategy, Pew Research Center launched an email course, which allowed them to leverage their reports and blog posts on U.S. Immigration. More recently The Guardian released a five-week email coaching plan called Reclaim Your Brain, which has attracted over 140,000 sign-ups.
Seeing examples like these, Ruth Hardy-Mullings, Head of Content at Community Care, a publication for social workers, wondered if newsletter courses could help solve some of their challenges. Their biggest driver of traffic was their weekly newsletter. She was also aware of the friction readers faced finding time to log onto the website and proactively seek out training content. A course delivered straight to their inbox would be a good way to prove value.
They launched some test courses in March 2021, delivering six emails a week over a three week period. “We took the content from longer guides and hosted it within the body of the email itself, so it solved that problem of having to go and log in on the site,” Hardy-Mullings explained. “Someone was able to open up their email, read the content and get that learning wherever they are, whether they’re in a car before they go and do a home visit, on their commute home, making use of those small amounts of time that people do have.”
Each email had a recap section at the beginning, a progress bar to keep people motivated, further reading links, and a reflective exercise at the end. Hardy-Mullings noted that signing up for a finite period of time was helpful for professionals who get thousands of emails. “The general feedback was that people really loved the convenience of the course and that format of learning, a good way that could genuinely fit into their working week,” she said.
Email courses may not suit every publisher. However, they can be a strong way of repurposing evergreen content, reducing friction points for membership organizations, or giving samples of journalism for paywalled publications, to name a few use cases.
4. Prioritize list-cleaning for a healthy newsletter strategy
One of the most revealing sessions at the Summit was Maire Bonheim and David Alexander, Head and Deputy Head of Newsletters respectively at The Telegraph. They talked about how to turn around an underperforming newsletter, and noted that they often have to use different tactics across almost 40 newsletters in their portfolio.
Alexander was keen to emphasize that although metrics have a place in your newsletter strategy, they need to be the right ones. “If you put all your effort into getting a massive list, and you trick people into signing up to your newsletter, they’ll get it. But no one will care because they didn’t mean to get it in the first place,” he explained. “You’ll have a massive list, and over time, your email provider will think it’s spam, and they’ll just put it in everybody’s junk. Pursuing vanity stats is a fool’s game. Massive lists are not the aim. You want people to read your stuff.”
Clearing lists and pursuing slower, more genuine engagement is a braver path to take, especially with other commercial and business pressures publishers face. Bonheim said that they have different time periods for list cleaning different newsletters. “If a newsletter is a daily send, then we wait a shorter amount of time before we list cleanse, whereas if something’s weekly or even monthly, we wait longer,” she explained.
The Telegraph was also facing an issue where when some marketing emails were sent to editorial newsletter segments, readers were getting confused and newsletters were ending up in the promotions tab.
“As a whole at The Telegraph… the volume of emails had gone up hugely, and we needed to get smarter about our overall email strategy and cleverer about who we segment and target,” Bonheim said, explaining that they send warnings about removing readers from lists if they don’t ‘Click to stay’. “So to combat that, we became much more stringent with our list cleanse emails, and that seems to be having a positive impact.”
The takeaway
These strategies may not work for every publisher, and one theme which emerged strongly from the Publisher Newsletter Summit is that newsletters can be used for a wide range of different purposes. The key is to be very clear for each newsletter what its purpose is, and how that will be measured.
“[Key metrics] are so different across all our titles,” said Alexander of his work on The Telegraph’s newsletters. “I’ve worked on newsletters that have had almost 1,000 words in them, and people want to read them more than anything. I’ve also looked after newsletters where it’s all about getting people through to the site. You have to be really clear on what’s important.”
Whether it’s exploring the potential of short email ‘courses’ or letting editors take a personal lead, there are plenty of ways to freshen up a newsletter strategy. But whether this is through iterative changes, pivots or launches, keep the newsletter’s purpose front and center.
As we approach opening arguments of Google’s landmark AdTech trial on September 9th, it is a good time to reflect on the calendar of events leading to this moment. It is useful to consider the context and critical points at play in the case against Google, particularly given last week’s search antitrust verdict.
To recap, here is the timeline to date of the four major lawsuits alleging Google engaged in monopolistic behavior:
Dec 11, 2023 | A federal jury found that Google’s app store violated antitrust law
So, as we look toward the start of the next phase in the antitrust actions against Google, here are five key considerations for media executives, journalists covering these cases, and for the general public—as this company’s anticompetitive behavior impacts almost every person online.
1. Ending Google’s innocence narratives: The abusive monopoly is confirmed
The first significant outcome of the search case is the formal acknowledgment of Google’s monopolistic status. It’s no longer a matter of debate whether Google is a monopoly. Given that the court has ruled definitively on this point, I have no idea why The Information is sending out polls asking its subscribers if Google is a monopoly. This is no longer a subject of debate.
A unanimous jury of Northern Californians last December, and now a D.C. district court judge last week, have decisively found that Google monopolizes four critical markets: general search services, search text ads, Android app distribution, and Android in-app billing. More importantly, the verdicts also found that Google engaged in anticompetitive conduct to maintain these monopolies. The wider Search verdict—a fabulous read—effectively ends any narrative of Google’s innocence and sets the stage for a broader reckoning within the tech industry.
2. Illuminating Google’s tactics: The truth shines through
The trial last Fall exposed the extent of Google’s market power and its aggressive, if not illegal, tactics. Under oath, former Google employees (often referred to as “Xooglers”), partners, and even current employees provided testimony that has shed light on the company’s practices.
Discovery in these cases has revealed much about Google’s internal operations, with documents and testimony uncovering the strategies Google used to maintain its dominance to maximize its benefits. These revelations are crucial not only for the legal proceedings but also for broader public understanding of how big tech companies operate behind closed doors.
3. A matter of public interest: The stakes for media and society
The implications of these cases extend far beyond Google’s corporate interests. Google is not just a search company. It is not just a tech giant. Google is the single largest distributor of news and entertainment—as well as the advertising dollars that sustain these industries. With annual revenues nearing $300 billion, the company’s influence over the media landscape is immense.
Taken together—Google AdTech case, along with the Search verdict—arguably mark the most significant antitrust action affecting the media industry in a half-century. The outcome will have profound implications for how information and advertising are distributed in the digital age. Yet, despite the critical nature of this case, there has been a surprising lack of press coverage and public awareness about the evidence presented.
Let me try to illustrate not only why the AdTech trial matters, but why it is a story the public needs to hear:
What if I told you the heads of Chrome, Android, and AdTech divisions collaborated via email to maximize ad revenues to hit their quarterly targets?
What if I told you Google’s advertising auctions weren’t always second-price auctions, but that publishers were at times secretly paid the third price while Google pocketed the difference?
And what if the auction bids included another arbitrary, secretive variable determined unilaterally by Google?
What if I told you Google exerted its outsized influence on the very shape of the media ecosystem based on the position that subscription news sites were a threat to the open web?
What if I told you Google’s notorious “Jedi Blue” deal with Facebook is still a part of the evidence in this case and that the key Meta employee who briefed Mark Zuckerberg ahead of his meeting with Sundar Pichai will be testifying this September?
These cases impact almost every searcher’s ability to access news, entertainment and information. If those stakes aren’t high enough, the cast of players and the Machiavellian twists make for compelling storytelling. The public needs to know.
4. Converging lawsuits: A unified attack on anticompetitive practices
The lawsuits against Google, though focusing on different aspects of the company’s operations— app store, search and AdTech—share common themes. Judges have noted that Google allowed employee messages to be purged by default, despite ongoing litigation holds, and manipulated auctions to impact revenues. These findings indicate a pattern of behavior that transcends individual cases. It points to a systematic approach to maintaining its monopoly power.
The convergence of these lawsuits highlights the interconnected nature of Google’s business practices and the data and queries at scale serving as the core of its business model. It’s becoming increasingly clear that any meaningful remedy must address the chokepoints of Google’s operations that feed the data and query scale. Doing so should also open opportunities for new entrants in the emerging field of generative AI.
5. Remedies on the horizon: structural changes loom large
The future of the media industry will be on display in federal court rooms on both sides of the Potomac next month. As the separate remedies trial for the search case gets underway in the DC district court and the AdTech trial starts in the Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria), discussions about potential remedies have begun to surface.
While short-term solutions, such as prohibiting Google’s commercial deals to serve as the default search engine on browsers and operating systems, are being considered, it’s evident that more substantial structural remedies will be necessary. The prosecuting teams, under the leadership of Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter, seem to understand the intricacies of Google’s business model just as well as industry insiders. Without structural changes—such as breaking up Google’s control over key gatekeeping assets like Chrome, Android, YouTube, and its AdTech supply chain and data. it will be impossible to mitigate Google’s monopolistic practices in the long term.
The idea of “Baby Googles,” or the division of Google into smaller, independent entities, is not just a hypothetical scenario; it’s a very real possibility that could reshape the tech and media industry.
The future of Big Tech and the free market
The second verdict against Google marks a turning point in the battle against monopolistic practices in the tech industry. The outcomes of these legal battles will not only impact Google but will also set precedents for how other tech giants like Apple, Amazon, and Meta—all currently being sued by either the Department of Justice or Federal Trade Commission or both—are regulated in the future.
But it is important to remember that this isn’t just about setting the tone for Big Tech regulation. It is about the underlying motivation behind these cases; the very reason America has antitrust laws in place and a framework to enforce them. As DOJ antitrust chief Kanter framed it in an interview on CNBC, actions like these are particularly critical during times of technological change. As AI is poised to reshape search—and impact industries of all kinds—ensuring that the marketplace is a healthy one, where competition and innovation flourish, takes on paramount importance.
“As we sit here at the next technological inflection point,” Kanter said, “it’s extremely important that we protect the competitive process to make sure that the benefits of technological innovation, the excitement that we’re all feeling from AI… can reach consumers in a fully competitive way.”
It looks like the era of unchecked dominance by a few tech behemoths may be coming to an end, with far-reaching consequences for the entire digital economy.
In today’s media landscape, engaging younger audiences is both a challenge and an opportunity for newsrooms. Understanding the media habits and preferences of Gen Z is crucial for the sustainability and long-term relevance of players across the media industry.
Two recent papers, the latest Digital News Report and FT Strategies Next Gen News Study, offer valuable insights into younger audiences and strategies for effectively reaching and engaging them.
Here are the key trends media executives need to be aware of, followed by suggestions about how to act on them to improve engagement among young audiences.
Trend 1: A preference for digital
Not surprisingly, we need to start with (or truly accept) the shift away from traditional media habits. Having grown up with media on-demand and the ability to consume on mobile devices, younger audiences tend to access content very differently from their parents.
In terms of news media, as Nic Newman – the lead author of the Digital News Report – notes, younger audiences are “much less likely to use traditional sources such as TV and radio news and much more likely to access via social media, aggregators, and search.”
Instead, preference is usually given to both short-form and long-form video content on platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube. “The youngest group (Gen Z) are most likely to say that social media is their main source of news,” Newman adds.
Trend 2: Authenticity over traditional credentials
Another critical shift can be seen in concepts of credibility. Traditional benchmarks such as awards and brand recognition, hold less sway with younger consumers, observes FT Strategies’ Liat Fainman-Adelman.
Instead, perceptions of authenticity are key to this group’s definition of trustworthiness.
“Someone who identifies with a certain community / group or has lived through that event is seen as more credible in covering a related news event,” Fainman-Adelman explains. “Someone documenting their daily life in Ukraine on TikTok may be more popular and trusted than a trained journalist sent to cover the war.”
This trend helps explain the gravitation towards individuals over institutions seen in both reports.
“Young people want to feel connected to those who are delivering them news and information,” Fainman-Adelman contends. “It’s important for them to see who they really are and understand their underlying motivations.”
Trend 3: A level of news skepticism
Gen Z audiences want to understand the motivations and identities of the people behind the news. However, the formats used by many traditional media outlets often fail to speak to this need. In turn, this has led to a heightened skepticism towards the traditional news media.
“Individual contributors are seen as more personable and relatable than a faceless byline,” Fainman-Adelman says.
Subsequently, Newman explains, “because they are exposed to so many different sources, and see so many different perspectives, young people tend to [be] highly skeptical of most information and often question the ‘agenda’ of all news sources including mainstream news providers.”
This tendency is also heightened by the more “lean back” approach seen among many younger users, whereby they consume media in a more passive – and less intentional – manner. Their media experiences are often mediated through algorithms, rather than by going direct to specific sources.
That means this group is “much less likely to have a connection with traditional news brands preferring the news to come to them,” Newman says, observing how relationships are “driven more by relevance of the content itself rather than where it comes from.”
Trend 4: Broader definitions of “the news”
Younger audiences also have a looser, more fluid, interpretation of what is news and the trusted sources that are sharing it (e.g. alternative/independent sources, personalities and influencers).
As Newman outlined in an email interview, “young people make a distinction between ‘the news’ as the narrow, traditional agenda of politics and current affairs and ‘news’ as a much wider umbrella encompassing topics like sports, entertainment, celebrity gossip, culture, and science.
“Often they see narrow(ly-defined) news as a chore to spend as little time with as possible. But are prepared to spend more time with passions and diversions.”
Trend 5: Navigating information overload
Participants in FT Strategies’ study were born after the year 2000. “That’s had a pretty significant impact on how they interact with media and technology,” Fainman-Adelman told me via email.
Growing up in the digital age, young audiences are adept at filtering the large volume of content we are exposed to every day to find the material that interests them. That’s one reason why short-form media is particularly appealing to them.
And despite concerns about shorter attention spans, FT Strategies found that younger audiences do engage in long-form content (e.g. podcasts, online videos etc.) if it is of interest to them.
Five strategic recommendations for media companies to engage younger audiences
Given these insights, media players need to adopt a multifaceted approach to engage younger audiences. Of course, this demographic is not an homogeneous group. Nevertheless, we can identify a number of broad characteristics that publishers should be looking to adopt.
Here are five key approaches media executives need to implement (if you have not already):
Tactic 1: Embrace visually-oriented social networks
Prioritize platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube, where younger people spend much of their time. As Newman notes, the last few Digital News reports have shown that younger audiences are increasingly turning to these networks for news and other content.
Although media outlets tend to prioritize connections that they can monetize, Fainman-Adelman suggests “developing socially native content to build brand awareness on platforms (and eventually transitioning to more direct relationships).”
“Engaging the next generation will be crucial for legacy media’s sustainability and reducing the gap now will undoubtedly pay off in the long run,” Fainman-Adelman believes.
Tactic 2: Understand platform dynamics
YouTube, Instagram and TikTok have some shared qualities, but audiences use them differently. Creators need to tailor content based on the features and audience expectations of each network.
Fainman-Adelman advises, “Ensuring that news media is highly accessible (e.g., in terms of language, tone, humor) and engaging (e.g., multimedia, interactive, participatory). This “will be critical for building and retaining loyal audiences in the long run.”
Tactic 3: Emphasize authenticity
Shifts in tone are also key to providing a sense of intimacy and authenticity younger audiences crave. The Next Gen News report identifies “how social media personalities’ lived experiences boosted their authenticity and relatability when it came to certain topics.”
This can be hard for mainstream outlets to replicate. But, the Digital News Report highlights younger players – such as Dylan Page (aka News Daddy) in the UK, Vitus Spehar (best known for Under the Desk News on TikTok) in the USA and Hugo Travers (Hugo Décrypte) in France – which others can learn from.
Stressing transparency in reporting processes and clearly distinguishing between news, analysis, and opinion can also help build credibility among skeptical younger viewers.
Tactic 4: Embrace diversity
This can take many forms, including using formats such as short videos, podcasts, and interactive articles that are engaging and accessible. Broadening the range of topics covered and adopting a more conversational tone can also make news more appealing to Gen Z audiences.
Meanwhile, FT Strategies make the case for “partnering with creators, empowering editorial talent to share their [personal] stories, and … [hiring] younger and more diverse journalists who are permitted to express themselves in an authentic way, particularly on social media.”
Sophia Smith Galer (ex-BBC and Vice News) and Taylor Lorenz (The Washington Post) were identified by the report’s Advisory Board as exemplars with large social media followings who enable “their authentic personalities to shine through their work.”
Tactic 5: Change the narrative
“One of the most profound shifts we’ve seen among younger audiences is who and what they see as trustworthy” Fainman-Adelman says.
Media players need to learn from this and avoid doing things the way that they always have done. Afterall, for many younger audiences, these tried and trusted techniques don’t resonate with them.
Changing the paradigm means being clearer about editorial processes, funding sources, and potential biases. A genuine openness to feedback and audience engagement also matters.
Incorporating solutions journalism and more positive narratives may also help. Offering content that provides hope and inspires action can resonate with younger demographics (and others), moving away from the “doom and gloom” narrative many consumers associate with the media.
Bringing it all together
Engaging more effectively with younger audiences requires a deep understanding of their media habits and preferences. There are also potential long-term benefits to this too. As Fainman-Adelman reminds us, “several studies show that young people are often accurate predictors for broader shifts in society.”
Existing trends like widespread multimedia consumption, passively accessing content via social and other indirect ways (instead of doing direct), as well as a desire for shifts in the tone and breadth of content being provided, are here to stay. And they are only going to become more mainstream.
As a result, media players must be willing to experiment with new formats and approaches. These should prioritize authenticity, relevance, diverse content and more diverse voices. Through this, news organizations and publishers will be better placed to build trust and loyalty among younger audiences.
In doing this, Newman reminds us that “mainstream news brands cannot please all young people all the time due to the fragmented ways in which they consume media.” But, he says, “they can give themselves a better chance of being chosen more often.”
As the media landscape continues to evolve, those who adapt will not only survive but thrive. In an increasingly fragmented environment, adopting these strategies to connect with younger audiences can transform media organizations into trusted and preferred content sources for both the next generation and everyone else.
On August 5, US District Court Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google “is a monopolist and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly” in search and in text ads. The trial will now move to the “remedies” stage where the judge will hear arguments about what fixes should be imposed going forward including impact on the developing GAI market as captured here.
Google has already announced it will appeal the ruling but this represents a significant milestone in our years long effort to call attention to Google’s anticompetitive behavior. Indeed, DCN first met with officials at the Department of Justice in 2017 on this matter before ramping up in late 2018. It also comes at a sensitive time for Google with the Department of Justice’s second trial (adtech) set for opening arguments on September 9th with many relevant findings from this decision carrying over to that case.
We will conduct an analysis of the ruling, which we plan to share with our membership in the coming days.
The Economist is an industry leader when it comes to subscriptions innovation: Last year, they paved the way in audio by paywalling all but one of their podcast portfolio. The Economist’s multi award-winning Espresso app has been used as a blueprint for other publishers looking to offer a sample of content behind a cheaper paywall. Earlier this year they also launched the largest brand campaign since the early 2000s in a bid to attract younger readers.
What binds these initiatives together is a strong consumer research team. In addition to brand building and surveying about new initiatives or products, this team is also involved in almost all aspects of the organization, from retention efforts to optimizing its growing B2B business.
The Economist’s Global Head of Consumer Research Seema Hope believes that this is a function more publishers should be seriously considering to optimize subscription efforts. There is real value to be gained in getting to know audiences on a deeper level, even for those without paywalled products.
Getting to know consumer research
Hope’s Consumer Research team is one of the few which has ongoing communication with readers. “We get a lot of dialogue through editorial; people write in,” she noted. “But that two-way conversation is where we come in, and we take that really seriously. We’re there to represent what consumers are saying, and it’s our job to be frontline and independent on that.”
The team is made up of a mixture of disciplines, from UX and design to data and research. Hope firmly believes that it is more important than ever to bring these together rather than operate in silos. “You want to make sure that you’re understanding everything about the consumer, not just the way they’re interacting with a product. You want to understand their needs and motivations,” she explained.
This does add a layer of pressure on research teams to specialize in multiple methodologies. But Hope has seen this be advantageous for careers. Her team has people who are strong in UX, qualitative research and talking to people, as well as experts in qualitative and statistical methodologies. As consumer researchers, being able to operate across all of these means that they can work more effectively with teams across the business, from product to consumer marketing. “We touch nearly every aspect of the organization. And that can only get wider,” Hope said.
An internal and external independent voice
One reason the consumer research team at The Economist is so effective is because they believe in taking stakeholders on the research journey with them. “We won’t just deliver a project and say: ‘Here you go,’” Hope said, explaining how they anticipate any resistance to findings. “We start in partnership with them, working out what the objective is, what the business challenges are. Then our job is finding the right methodology to get them to a deeper understanding.”
Most of the projects the team are involved with are “quite iterative, with constant dialogue,” so findings aren’t a surprise. Hope also outlined that her researchers are often embedded in other teams while a project is ongoing so that everything is transparent. For example, if a consumer has made a statement about user experience in a video, that video is shared with the relevant people in The Economist’s Slack channels.
This perception extends to their interactions with participants, too. “It’s really important that we’re independent when we’re talking to consumers, and we make it really clear that you’re not going to hurt anyone’s feelings [with honest feedback],” Hope said. Constant and open dialogue with customers helps, as does keeping each other’s biases in check internally, with the team ensuring they’re not asking leading questions or putting a spin on data interpretation.
Currently working on growth and retention – once customers are acquired, how do we best keep them, as well as brand perception. Also students and what loyalty means for a news org.
Uncharted territory with Podcasts+
One prominent example of the Consumer Research team’s influence was in in shaping The Economist’s Podcasts+ program. Last October, the publisher moved all but its daily The Intelligence podcast behind a paywall, offering a separate podcast subscription product.
Planning for this was a challenge as virtually no other publishers had made such a move (and still haven’t!). Many consumers will have never come across a paid-for podcast until they hit The Economist’s paywall.
The decision to charge for podcasts was one the whole company stood by. It seemed incongruous to have such a significant product available for free when nothing else was? But they had concerns about how audiences would respond. Hope’s team started with needs, behaviors and motivations. This shaped their messaging and approach.
“It was interesting the way the project evolved. Our consumers were telling us, ‘I can see why you’re doing this. You value your journalism. It’s really in-depth. It’s well-researched. It’s amazing to hear the voice of the journalists in my ear. I feel a real personal connection to this person,’” she explained. “So in the end, our consumers told us the kind of language that we should use when talking to them.”
It took months of conversations and rigorous testing before they arrived at a model that made sense for the publication, as well as one consumers would take up. The Intelligence daily podcast would remain free as a daily touchpoint. However, all other weekly and daily shows would be available for $4.90/month, or as part of the full Economist subscription package.
Hope says that there has been uptake not just of the podcast-only package, but also to the full subscription. One finding that her team were able to pick up was the perception of increased value now that the podcasts were paywalled. “Once you start charging for something, people put more of a value on it. So it’s changed that perception of quality content because they’re now paying for it, and increasing their listening,” she noted.
Now, their focus is on understanding how to move people along the funnel from free to podcast to full subscriber. Hope’s work is never done; consumer research is an ongoing dialogue as tools, technology and behaviors evolve. “I think it’s naive to think you get it right the first time. It’s naive to think that you stop learning. So we rarely say, ‘That’s the end of a project’,” she said.
Lessons from The Economist’s consumer research
Hope has had over 16 years working in audience research, and firmly believes it’s a role all publishers should have to inform decisions across the business. It’s a role that changes and evolves. “But at the very crux of it, we are, as publishers, curating and creating content for a person,” she emphasized. “If you don’t understand what they’re thinking and the why, what, who they are as people, it’s very difficult to adapt what you’re doing.”
We may have more data and insights than ever before into our audiences. But this can’t always provide the full picture about what is going on with consumers. To truly create products that audiences not only enjoy, but are willing to pay for, benefits greatly from insights that run deeper than data. For The Economist – ranked sixth most effective subscriber conversion publisher globally – having a dedicated consumer research team to get under the skin of what really makes their audience tick is clearly paying off.
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court – split along ideological lines – upended the Chevron doctrine in its ruling on the case of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (Loper Bright). The 1984 Chevron doctrine, which has served as the bedrock of administrative law, held that where a federal agency is tasked with enforcing an ambiguous statute with multiple reasonable interpretations, a court must defer to the agency’s expertise.
One prominent example of the doctrine’s application is the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Net Neutrality orders. Under President Trump, a Republican-led FCC rescinded the Net Neutrality rule, which was issued during the Obama Administration and the courts deferred to the agency’s expertise. Fast forward to the Biden Administration’s FCC, which pushed a new Net Neutrality rule. Again, the courts deferred to the agency’s expertise. Critics of the Chevron doctrine will often point to Net Neutrality as an example of how it breeds regulatory uncertainty.
The Court’s new ruling in the Loper case explicitly invalidated the Chevron doctrine and stated that the 1946 Administrative Procedures Act (APA) requires federal courts, not administrative agencies, to independently assess whether an agency’s actions fall within its statutory authority as expressed by Congress. This shift in the character of judicial oversight is a win for the opponents of federal regulations. It heralds the beginning of an era characterized by intensified examination of agency decisions. That is because federal courts will now decide whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority where congressional intent is ambiguous.
In the Net Neutrality cases above, this means that courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will decide whether the FCC has the authority to issue a Net Neutrality rule. A conservative court is likely to rule that an aggressive Net Neutrality rule will have overstepped the FCC’s statutory authority, which means that Congress will have to pass specific authorizing legislation for the FCC to move forward.
Welcome to legal limbo
While the implications will play out for decades, there are some important near-term impacts for publishers and the tech industry. For starters, we are likely to be in legal limbo for the next few years. The upending of Chevron means that federal judges must now interpret whether a federal agency has overreached its statutory authority.
Many predict a flood of new litigation to challenge existing and pending regulations. Indeed, some groups have already hinted at their plans to do so. That said, not all federal judges share the same philosophy. Therefore, we can expect conflicting rulings in the near term as various judges will interpret the breadth of an agency’s authority differently. Ultimately, those conflicting rulings will make their way to the Supreme Court, though that will likely take a few years. In the short term, companies may be left with a patchwork of regulations with which to comply. For media companies, this could mean conflicting legal guidance on what kinds of personal data can be collected and used by advertisers and ad tech companies among other things.
Throttling the FTC
Beyond the general legal uncertainty, we should also expect a significant curtailment of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) rulemaking. For better or worse, the FTC’s main statutory authority resides in Section 5 of the FTC Act, which charges the agency with enforcing against “unfair or deceptive” business practices.
Under Chair Lina Khan, the FTC has used this broad authority to aggressively pursue data brokers and publish new regulations to curb collection and use of sensitive data. However, that authority may come under scrutiny now that Chevron deference has been swept away.
Here are some specific FTC initiatives worth watching:
Commercial Surveillance Rule. In 2022, the FTC requested comments on whether it should issue a rule to regulate the ubiquitous collection of consumer data across the web. Ever since, we have been expecting the agency to issue a proposed rule to regulate the “commercial surveillance” economy. Given the importance of third party and webwide data collection to the largest tech companies, any FTC rule is now more likely to be met with an immediate lawsuit challenging the agency’s authority to issue such rules. What’s more, the undoing of Chevron may change the FTC’s decision about whether to proceed with the rule at all since a court challenge will be expensive and could lead to a damaging precedent.
COPPA enforcement. Congress granted the FTC specific authority to issue rules and enforce the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act in 1998. Over the years, the agency has routinely updated its guidance on how companies should comply to include limits on what kinds of data companies can collect. Even though the FTC has clear statutory authority to enforce COPPA, In the wake of Chevron’s undoing, we are likely to see some industry groups file suit to argue that the FTC exceeded its authority to block some types of data from being collected and used.
Artificial intelligence. The FTC has announced investigations into various leading AI companies with an eye toward better understanding the relationship between tech giants and AI companies. The agency is concerned that undisclosed or creative partnerships among a few large companies could lock out competition in the burgeoning AI marketplace. However, Congress has not passed any AI legislation much less anything that would grant the FTC jurisdiction. As a result, the FTC investigation may not yield much and, even if the FTC were to move forward with fines and/or remedies, we should expect a well-funded tech sector to challenge the FTC’s authority in court.
Significant impact for the future
Even though the Court’s ruling is still new, the full impact on federal rulemaking and, subsequently, on the tech sector is likely to be massive. In the short-term, confusion will be prevalent and media organizations may struggle to balance the various legal rulings and interpretations that impact digital businesses.
As more and more regulations are scrutinized and as lower courts issue new rulings based on the Supreme Court’s new guidance, we could see regulations dialed back or eliminated altogether that could open a new era of aggressive data collection and marketing. All of this serves as an important reminder that Congress needs to act now more than ever on issues like data privacy, AI and competition.
Podcasting — it’s been a hot business since Serial became a cultural phenomenon back in 2014, spurring SNL skits and inspiring satirical spinoffs on streaming networks. In the years since the true crime megahit launched, there’s been a podcasting goldrush among publishers, and for good reason.
There’s a hunger among audiences for quality audio content. More and more people are tuning into podcasts: Last year alone, nearly 100 million Americans listened to podcasts every week, according to Edison Research.
But as an increasing number of media companies, brands, and individuals have ventured into a growing sea of audio productions (there are 450 million podcasts out there in the world), the water has become rough and murky. Last year, the audio industry saw mass layoffs, canceled productions, and shrinking ad revenue.
It’s led some to question whether podcasting itself was just a passing trend, a la the disastrous 2015 media industry “pivot to video.” Yet, as the audio industry and the publishers who create podcasts come off a “year of reckoning,” it’s clear that one brand seems to have figured out a way to build something solid from podcasting.
A podcasting business with sustainable revenue
Slate dove into the podcasting business with the Slate Political Gabfest in 2005, back when people were still listening on iPods, which is how the medium got its namesake. Since the early aughts, the Slate Podcast Network has put out dozens of shows. Its audio catalog currently boasts more than 20 titles, including listener-loved and award-winning programs like Slow Burn,Decoder Ring,and Death, Sex, and Money.
Today, podcasting accounts for a whopping 50% of the company’s advertising revenue. But audio isn’t only about ad sales for Slate. “We know membership is a huge part of keeping our business diversified overall, and podcasts are a big part of that,” says Heidi Strom Moon, Slate’s Director of Subscriptions.
The Slate Plus membership program started in 2014, and podcasts have been woven into its fabric since the jump. In each of the Slate Podcast Network’s shows, podcast listeners will hear on-air hosts encouraging them to join Slate Plus, via the Slate website, or hear pre-recorded ads directing listeners to sign up.
To support the company’s overall subscription business, “We do things like run remnant inventory ads (for Slate Plus) across the network to let people know about different shows and episodes that we’re doing,” says Strom Moon.
When signing up for Slate Plus, a member can get a three month trial for $15.00, and a full subscription runs $119.00 per year. You might be wondering: Why, exactly, would someone stop listening to a free podcast to sign up for a paid subscription? The answer is built into Slate’s strategy.
“Within each show, we talk a lot about what the benefits you’ll get by joining Slate Plus,” says Heidi Strom Moon. “Those include ad free (listening) benefits, extended listening, and premium episodes that you’ll get as a member. And a lot of that is what drives people to subscribe. Across many of our shows, we have exclusive episodes, extended episodes, and other kinds of bonus content, which we’ll be doing even more of in the weeks and months to come. ”
And the strategy is working. Last year, company revenue from Slate Plus increased 33%. Strom Moon says that AMICUS, Slate’s podcast on jurisprudence and the law, is one of the Slate Plus’ stand-out success stories.
Using podcasting exclusivity to drive paid subscriptions
“AMICUS is one of our big drivers of membership,” she says. “They do weekly standalone bonus episodes for members. So (on air), they’ll talk about what members can get in their bonus episodes each week.”
When listening to AMICUS, the benefits of the Slate Plus membership program are touted, and some of those benefits are intrinsically tied to content strategy. As the Supreme Court reached the end of its term this year and dropped major, bombshell decisions every week of June, AMICUS hopped into action to cover and dissect the rulings in weekly emergency podcast episodes — unscheduled content designed to react to the breaking news — and integrated Slate Plus into the strategy.
“For example, just going into that regular weekly cadence of having a standalone Slate Plus exclusive episode, especially when we do the emergency drops, we’ve seen a 146% increase in (Slate Plus) conversion since we’ve gotten to that regular weekly cadence (covering new Supreme Court decisions),” Strom Moon says.
So how does Slate Plus work from a technical standpoint? When members sign up on the Slate website, Slate Plus listeners get exclusive podcast feeds — the place where new episodes appear and live within a listening app ecosystem. The exclusive feeds can be accessed through the Slate mobile app, or anywhere listeners are already getting their audio content.
“Slate Plus members can subscribe directly on the Slate website, and from there if you’re already using a podcast app that you love and you wanna continue using, you can go ahead and add your premium feeds to any of those apps,” Strom Moon says. “We have partnerships with platforms like Spotify and Apple Podcasts to make it easier for people to subscribe on those platforms, if that’s where they’re listening and subscribing. We offer all of those options so that people can pick and choose what works best for them.”
While AMICUS may be offering listeners something immediate — quick reaction to what’s going on with Supreme Court rulings on a given day — Slate Plus is also tapping its audio back catalog to drive subscriptions.
“One thing we recently did is we resurfaced an evergreen series that we had done a few years back, calledThe Queen,” Strom Moon says. “We decided that was really good content that people would be interested in again. So we resurfaced that, and that has led to new conversions as people rediscovered this really interesting story.”
Gaining control of your audience through podcasting
While podcasts are a huge driver for Slate Plus, audio is only part of the success story.
“So it’s a combination of benefits for both listeners and readers,” Strom Moon says. “So on the written side, because of the metered paywall (on the Slate website), Slate Plus members get unlimited access to everything Slate — hundreds of articles a month, plus our extensive written archive of almost 25 years of content. We also have member exclusive advice columns. So if you’re an advice fan, and a lot of our readers are, you get even more advice as a Slate Plus member. We also have a member newsletter and a Facebook group.”
For Slate, it’s all about creating multiple touch points and offerings to get audiences to sign up.
“Slate Plus continues to be a big priority because we do think there’s a lot of opportunity for growth there,” Strom Moon says. “It’s the line of business we have the most control over.”
The data is clear: a chasm exists between what traditional news offers and what younger audiences crave. Decades of research haven’t bridged this gap, and proposed solutions often fall short. Blumler and McQuail’s (1970) Need for Gratification Theory suggests people use media to fulfill specific desires. You do have to wonder if the problem a mismatch in needs. Perhaps traditional news fails to satisfy younger generations’ hunger for in-depth analysis or a more positive outlook, driving them to seek information elsewhere. This disconnect demands a fresh approach – one that bridges the gap and fosters genuine connection.
A Spring 2023 Harvard Youth Poll reveals that young Americans prioritize economic concerns like inflation, healthcare, housing, and job availability, alongside social justice and environmental issues like reproductive rights, climate change, and immigration. This focus mirrors global trends. However, traditional media coverage often falls short on these topics. The rise of “alternative platforms” and the demand for short, relatable, and authentic content signals a broader shift in news consumption. Furthermore, Gen X’s declining interest and the perception of traditional media content as distant, pedantic, and delivered on outdated platforms underscore the need to completely rethink how we deliver news.
Despite the challenges, a bright future awaits news media built on growth and audience engagement. The key lies in a shift towards hyper-local coverage. This doesn’t mean abandoning national and global news. Rather, it means prioritizing content that resonates with the local audience. Imagine relatable journalists delivering stories on local issues through engaging formats like social media posts, listicles, explainers, and high-quality video content. This focus has demonstrably built loyal readership and increased audience size for news organizations around the country.
A decline in news interest among Gen X and Millennials, as reported by the Pew Research Center, and a growing preference for authenticity in news presenters, according to Reuters 2022 Digital News Report, paint a clear picture of the current news consumption landscape. Addressing these audience preferences and tailoring content to local issues can foster greater trust and engagement with news media.
The solution seems straightforward: connect the dots between state or regional events and their impact on local communities. However doing this effectively is harder than it seems. News outlets must transition from high-level reporting to a more responsible and objective approach. This means translating complex issues into clear, concise explanations that highlight the specific impact on people’s daily lives. For example, a national story on rising gas prices might be tailored locally to show how much transportation costs have increased in your city and how residents are coping.
Take, for instance, the Miami Herald’s recent spring climate change article on sea levels rising. This article uses multimedia storytelling to explore the rising sea level’s impact on Miami, a city particularly vulnerable to coastal flooding. The article features data insights from local scientists and researchers and explains how climate change is affecting the city’s infrastructure and communities. By connecting the global threat of climate change to the specific challenges faced by Miami, this article highlights the urgency of addressing sea level rise. This focus on local impacts can potentially empower younger audiences to engage with the issue in their city, and “actionability” is something that is particularly resonant with this group.
As we navigate the evolving media landscape and changing news consumption habits, traditional media must redefine its role. It should not only inform, but also serve as a vital resource for today’s and tomorrow’s generations. This shift is crucial for both local and national news outlets as they strive to bridge the generational gap and earn trust.
Younger audiences increasingly seek news that offers practical and useful information for their daily lives. This demand highlights the need for journalism to evolve beyond reporting. News organizations must provide guidance and resources on various topics, offering actionable insights that empower readers.
The challenge lies in transforming news into actionable resources that not only inform but also empower and engage audiences. Organizations like NPR have shown the way by expanding their coverage to include comprehensive guides and interactive tools on topics like financial planning and mental health resources. These resources equip readers to make informed decisions and take meaningful action based on factual reporting.
By providing practical resources alongside factual reporting, news organizations can empower readers with deeper understanding and the tools they need to take action. This ensures content remains informative while upholding journalistic integrity. In an era where accessible knowledge and meaningful impact are highly valued, this approach fosters informed decision-making and strengthens audience engagement.
Embracing hyper-local coverage and authentic storytelling will enable news organizations to bridge the chasm that separates them from Gen X and Millennials. Focusing on issues that directly impact these audiences’ daily lives fosters a sense of relevance and connection. Authentic voices, relatable formats, and clear explanations that empower readers with actionable insights will cultivate trust and engagement. This also translates to a more valuable audience for advertisers, potentially leading to increased revenue streams.
In essence, a focus on local issues and a commitment to genuine storytelling that makes issues personally relevant represents a strategic investment in the future of news. By prioritizing content that resonates with younger generations, news organizations can not only ensure their long-term sustainability but also cultivate a more engaged and informed citizenry. A future where news is relevant, sustainable, and fosters meaningful connections between audiences and journalists is entirely within reach.
Media companies say they want to grow their younger audiences. So, why aren’t executives making more of a concerted effort to lean on that same generation for guidance on how to reach that audience?
Earlier this year, I attended an industry conference event in San Francisco where leading executives from the fields of advertising, marketing, broadcasting and streaming came together to exchange thoughts and ideas on how their industries are converging and where things are headed next.
One of the presenting panelists was Jasmin Corley, a 20-something billed as a “social media influencer” who, in fact, has spent the formative years of her young life establishing and building her own fashion and beauty media brand across social video platforms. Hundreds of thousands of people follow Corley across Instagram, YouTube Shorts and TikTok. Her best-performing clips have north of 1 million views — not an easy thing for anyone to pull off.
Corley shared the stage with executives who hailed from a leading electronics company, a television start-up and an advertising manager from a streaming-focused joint venture. Each of those panelists got more time to speak than she did. In fact, even the moderator — a well-known former reporter for an entertainment trade publication who now covers the free streaming space for a media research company — spoke more than Corley did.
She was asked just two questions, one from the moderator, one from a panelist who sought validation in his own product. The tone seemed to be this: Corley was lucky to share a stage with such esteemed executives in the media and advertising industry. Really, though, they were lucky to share a stage with her. Ultimately, it was a lost opportunity to hear from someone who not only reaches the younger generation on a regular basis, but who walks among them, too.
The same old management
If Corley was frustrated by the experience, she didn’t show it. She graciously exited the stage and went home. I wish I had been as graceful in my 20s. When I was hired to oversee digital initiatives for a Tribune Media-owned newsroom in 2008, I was a baby-faced 21-year-old who was still in college. I thought the company was hiring me for my ideas. Over time, I came to realize they brought me on because I could do a lot of work quickly. And they didn’t have to pay me very much to do it.
Every week, the station assembled different department heads for a meeting. In my first few meetings, I said nothing, though I had a lot of thoughts. Eventually, I spoke up, but it seemed like things were always being shot down. Conversations usually ended with the message that “it isn’t the way we do things here,” or “things are done for a reason,” something along those lines. The meetings did little to accomplish anything, except that everyone seemed annoyed with me toward the end. It was mutual. They mistook my confidence for arrogance; I mistook their arrogance for incompetence.
Times change but too many things stay the same
Perhaps if all sides had gone in with more of an open mind, things would have been different. Back then, media companies had very little to lose — traditional platforms were doing as well, if not better, than emerging digital ones. Today, the opposite is clearly true. Traditional platforms like broadcast radio and television are struggling to address a downturn in their advertising businesses. Meanwhile, next-generation platforms like TikTok, YouTube and Instagram seem to have more money than they know what to do with.
The reasons are numerous, and not too hard to understand. Take TV, for instance. While traditional TV still frames itself around a 30-minute or 1-hour episode, content creators on YouTube or Instagram can go as long as they want, unencumbered by schedules or time limits. They can 30-second clips three times a day, or a 30-minute tutorial twice a month, or any combination or variation in-between. While traditional TV might require a fully-developed script or outline, along with numerous pitch meetings and ad sales justifications, young people can simply grab their phone and create whatever they want to bring into the world.
The proliferation of tablets and smartphones, coupled with the abundance of social video platforms, has lowered the barrier of entry for content creation and distribution. No one understands this better than the generation who grew up with a mature Internet and digital toolset capable of handling those things. And they are taking full advantage of it.
The end result is highly-engaging content that connects with younger consumers, and influences them in many ways, including purchase intentions. A survey by Nerds Collective as reported in The Drum found that 45% of young Europeans who identify as Generation Z “want brands they’ve seen an influencer or celebrity wear,” while just 18% say they’re influenced by what their friends wear.
Young people turn to TikTok
Fashion is one thing. News and information is another. But similar trends apply. Young people are increasingly turning to TikTok and Instagram over Google to find things online (and, to be honest, you can’t really blame them, because Google is a hot mess). When it comes to news and current events, younger audiences are gravitating toward unfiltered personalities and curated experiences that podcasters like comedian Joe Rogan, radio host James O’Brien and French YouTube channel Hugo Décrype offer.
Why is this happening? Over the past few months, I’ve reached out to a number of key figures in media and entertainment to find out. Three executives told me they had to run things up the chain before they could speak with me — suggesting corporate bureaucracy has changed little since I worked in that TV newsroom all those years ago. I managed to secure interviews with three others. But it seemed that they either didn’t understand the situation or could only offer answers that didn’t address the issue at hand.
Change in strategy
I spent more than a month doing precisely the wrong thing: Trying to secure interviews with people with nice executive titles at well-established places, but whose businesses embody many of the problems that this column is trying to address. About two weeks ago, it finally occurred to me that I needed to reach someone who wasn’t involved in media and entertainment, but who spends a lot of time thinking and writing about these problems: Charles Benaiah.
Like me, Benaiah spent his early career working for established media brands before venturing out onto his own. Today, his job as the CEO of Watzan is to observe the landscape and dream up ways for it to improve.
“There are decades of ingrained expectations that are going to have to change,” Benaiah told me in an interview, after I filled him in on the above issues. “It’s not going to change quickly.”
Benaiah agrees that one way to attract and engage younger consumers is to create content that resonates with them. To do so requires hiring young people into key decision-making roles. It also means allowing personality to bubble through. He likens it to the better days of the newspaper industry, where someone might pick up a copy of the daily edition to read the latest clip from their favorite columnist. In the process, they have to flip through several pages of news, and might stop on a story here or there that is connected to, but otherwise separate from, the editorial section.
These days, the editorial page is X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. “We’re 25 years into social media, and I’ve always looked at Twitter as being the social media place for journalists,” Benaiah remarked. “Journalists are writing somewhat dry stories, because that’s what they’re asked to do. They’ve got these great, brilliant quips, and they toss them out all day, but they don’t work their way back into the personality of the newsroom — they make their way onto Twitter.”
Personality and connections
Newsrooms didn’t have a chance to embrace the idea of Twitter before young journalists gravitated to the platform on their own. Once news organizations saw that young journalists could attract a blockbuster following on the platform, they encouraged their reporters to link to their stories, as a way to drive traffic to their website.
The growing pains came when journalists really started to stretch out and let loose on Twitter. Controversies followed. Suddenly, a reporter’s off-hand remark or poorly-landed joke became fodder for another reporter’s mini exposé. Newsrooms that had never developed a framework of acceptable use and best social media practices suddenly found themselves cleaning up a lot of messes.
Some news organizations handled that better than others. However, for the most part, the industry really struggled to find an appropriate balance between giving young journalists the freedom to be themselves on a public platform and applying standards and ethics policies in a non-constraining way.
Striking that balance is important, Benaiah says, because newsrooms that are too rigid risk losing authoritative voices, many of which are deeply engaged with younger audiences. But a free-for-all is also problematic, because authority in news requires trust, and to be trust-worthy, one must be honest and believable.
Supporting young leaders
Young journalists can build authority and trust by being mentored by industry veterans who impart the best practices while embracing the idea that the way things have traditionally been done might not be the best way of doing things in the future. It won’t keep a young journalist from making mistakes, but a guiding hand can encourage them that it isn’t the end of the world. The payoff for giving emerging reporters the space to be themselves and the guidance to be accurate and reliable will be recognized in the long term, in a way that benefits both individual brands and companies at large.
Likewise, media companies that want to reach younger audiences have to hire young people into leadership roles and allow them to be an integral part in content creation and audience engagement strategies. That is the first step, and it is a substantial one. Not engaging young professionals as part of the process is a bit like asking someone who speaks English to create a product slogan in Greek. It makes no sense, yet this is what corporate America has done for years. It is not a winning formula.
At the industry conference I attended earlier this year, everyone in the room should have been clamoring to give Corley their card. They should have asked if she was willing to be a brand ambassador, to help put their product or service or company in front of her audience. They should have asked her for a little insight into the secret sauce that makes her content so tastefully appealing to thousands of viewers.
But no one did. Not that it mattered much to Corley. She went home, and immediately started working on her next project: The “Fr$h Editing Bootcamp.” Over the course of 30 days, Corley educated her followers on the best ways to make short-form videos really pop on social platforms. To date, those videos have amassed tens of thousands of views, and likely influenced the next batch of content creators. It is tough to predict what platforms those videos will live on in 5, 10, 20 years — but if traditional media companies are smart, they’ll do whatever it takes to bring those content creators in before they’re left in the dust.
Last month, I co-led a week-long journalism program during which we visited 16 newsrooms, media outlets and tech companies in New York. This study tour provided an in-depth snapshot of the biggest issues facing the media today and offered insights into some of the potential solutions publishers are exploring to address them.
We met with everyone from traditional media players – like The New York Times, Associated Press, CBS and Hearst – to digital providers such as Complex Media and ProPublica, as well as conversations with academics and policy experts. Based upon these visits and conversations, here are four key takeaways about the state of media and content publishing today.
1. Hands-on AI experience matters
Not surprisingly, AI dominated many conversations. Although recent research shows the American public is both skeptical and surprisingly unaware of these tools, the emergence of Generative AI – and the discussions around it – are impossible to ignore.
One mantra oft repeated throughout the week was that everyone in the media will need to be conversant with AI. Despite this, research has shown that many newsrooms are hesitant about adopting these technologies. Others, however, are taking a more proactive approach. “I like playing offense, not defense, Aimee Rinehart, Senior Product Manager AI Strategy at the Associated Press, told us. “Figure out how the tools work and your limits.”
With many media companies having to do more with less, AI can help improve workflows, support labor-intensive work like investigative journalism, as well as streamline and diversify content creation and distribution. By harnessing these AI-powered functions, smaller outlets may benefit the most, given the efficiencies these resource-strapped players may be able to unlock.
Reporting on AI is also an emerging journalistic beat. This is an area more newsrooms are likely to invest in, given AI’s potential to radically reshape our lives. As Hilke Schellmann, an Emmy‑award winning investigative reporter and journalism professor at NYU, told us “we used to hold powerful people to account, now we have to add holding AI accountable.”
Echoing Schellmann’s sentiments, “every journalist should be experimenting with AI,” one ProPublica journalist said. “We owe it to our audience to know what this is capable of.”
2. Demonstrating distinctiveness and value is imperative
One fear of an AI-driven world is that traffic to publishers will tank as Generative Search, and tools like ChatGPT, remove the need for users to visit the sites of creators and information providers. In that environment, distinctiveness, trustworthy and fresh content becomes more valuable than ever. “You need to produce journalism that gives people a reason to show up,” says Ryan Knutson, co-host of The Wall Street Journal’s daily news podcast, The Journal.
In response, publishers will need to demonstrate their expertise and unique voice. That means leaning more into service journalism, exclusives, and formats like explainers, analysis, newsletters, and podcasts.
Bloomberg’s John Authers, exemplifies this in his daily Points of Return newsletter. With more than three decades of experience covering markets and investments, he brings a longitudinal and distinctive human perspective to his reporting. Alongside this, scoops still matter, Authers suggests. After all, “journalism is about finding out something other people don’t know,” he says.
Media players also need to make a more effective case as to why original content needs to be supported and paid for. As Gaetane Michelle Lewis, SEO leader at the Associated Press, put it, “part of our job is communicating to the audience what we have and that you need it.”
For a non-profit like ProPublica that means demonstrating impact. They publish three impact reports a year, and their Annual Report highlights how their work has led to change at a time when “many newsrooms can no longer afford to take on this kind of deep-dive reporting.”
“Our North Star is the potential to make a positive change through impact,” Communications Director, Alexis Stephens, said. And she emphasized how “this form of journalism is critical to democracy.”
The New York Times’ business model is very different but its publisher, A.G. Sulzberger, has similarly advocated for the need for independent journalism. As he put it, “a fully informed society not only makes better decisions but operates with more trust, more empathy, and greater care.”
Given the competition from AI, streaming services, and other sources of attention, media outlets will increasingly need to advocate more forcefully for support through subscriptions, donations, sponsorships, and advertising. In doing this, they’ll need to address what sets them apart from the competition, and why this matters on a wider societal level.
“This is a perilous time for the free press,” Sulzberger told The New Yorker last year. “That reality should animate anyone who understands its central importance in a healthy democracy.”
3. Analytics and accessibility go hand in hand
Against this backdrop, finding and retaining audiences is more important than ever. However, keeping their attention is a major challenge. Data from Chartbeat revealed that half the audiences visiting outlets in their network stay on a site for fewer than 15 seconds.
This has multiple implications. From a revenue perspective, this may mean users aren’t on a page long enough for ad impressions to count. It also challenges outlets to look at how content is produced and presented.
In a world where media providers continue to emphasize growing reader revenues, getting audiences to dig deeper and stay for longer, is essential. “The longer someone reads, the more likely they are to return,” explained Chartbeat’s CMO Jill Nicolson.
There isn’t a magic wand to fix this. Tools for publishers to explore include compelling headlines, effective formats, layout, and linking strategies. Sometimes, Nicolson said, even small modifications can make all the difference.
These efforts don’t just apply to your website. They apply to every medium you use. Brendan Dunne of Complex Media referred to the need for “spicy titles” for episodes of their podcasts and YouTube videos. Julia D’Apolito, Associate Social Editor at Hearst Magazines, shared how their approach to content might be reversed. “We’ve been starting to do social-first projects… and then turning them into an article,” she said, rather than the other way round.
Staff at The New York Times also spoke about the potential for counter-programing. One way to combat news fatigue and avoidance is to shine a light on your non-news content. The success of NYT verticals such as Cooking, Wirecutter, and Games shows how diversifying content can create a more compelling and immersive proposition, making audiences return more often.
Lastly, language and tone matters. As one ProPublica journalist put it, “My editor always says pretend like you’re writing for Sesame Steet. Make things accurate, but simple.” Reflecting on their podcasts, Dunne also stresses the need for accessibility. “People want to feel like they’re part of a group chat, not a lecture,” he said.
Fundamentally, this also means being more audience-centric in the way that stories are approached and told. “Is the angle that’s interesting to us as editors the same as our audiences?” Nicolson asked us. Too often, the data would suggest, it is not.
4. Continued concern about the state of local news
Finally, the challenges faced by local news media, particularly newspapers, emerged in several discussions. Steven Waldman, the Founder and CEO of Rebuild Local News, reminded us that advertising revenue at local newspapers had dropped 82% in two decades. The issue is not “that the readers left the papers,” he said, “it’s that the advertisers did.”
For Waldman, the current crisis is an opportunity not just to “revive local news,” but also to “make better local news.” This means creating a more equitable landscape with content serving a wider range of audiences and making newsrooms more diverse. “Local news is a service profession,” he noted. “You’re serving the community, not the newsroom.”
According to new analysis, the number of partisan-funded outlets designed to appear like impartial news sources (so-called “pink slime” sites) now surpasses the number of genuine local daily newspapers in the USA. This significantly impacts the news and information communities receive, shaping their worldviews and decision-making.
Into this mix, AI is also rearing its ugly head. While it can be hugely beneficial for some media companies—“AI is the assistant I prayed for,” saysParis Brown, associate editor of The Baltimore Times. However, it can also be used to fuel misinformation, accelerating pink slime efforts.
“AI is supercharging lies,” one journalist at ProPublica told us, pointing to the emergence of “cheap fakes” alongside “deep fakes,” as content which can confirm existing biases. The absence of boots on the ground makes it harder for these efforts to be countered. Yet, as Hilke Schellmann, reminded us “in a world where we are going to be swimming in generative text, fact-checking is more important [than ever].”
This emerging battleground makes it all the more important for increased funding for local news. Legislative efforts, increased support from philanthropy, and other mechanisms can all play a role in helping grow and diversify this sector. Steven Waldman puts it plainly: “We have to solve the business model and the trust model at the same time,” he said.
All eyes on the future
The future of media is being written today, and our visit to New York provided a detailed insight into the principles and mindsets that will shape these next few chapters.
From the transformative potential of AI, to the urgent need to demonstrate distinctiveness and value, it is clear that sustainability has to be rooted in adaptability and innovation.
Using tools like AI and Analytics to inform decisions, while balancing this with a commitment to quality and community engagement is crucial. Media companies who fail to harness these technologies are likely to get left behind.
In an AI-driven world, more than ever, publishers need to stand out or risk fading away. Original content, unique voices, counter-programming, being “audience first,” and other strategies can all play a role in this. Simultaneously, media players must also actively advocate for why their original content needs to be funded and paid for.
Our week-long journey through the heart of New York’s media landscape challenged the narrative that news media and journalism are dying. It isn’t. It’s just evolving. And fast.
