Journalism Industry: What's Next For The News
What's next for local and international media in the world of manosphere podcasts, Donald Trump, and declining readership?
In October, New York Magazine published its annual Power Issue focusing on the news media. The article (If you’re interested in checking out, read here) is an intriguing look into the nuts and bolts of the media industry, which is both chaotic and uncertain in the age of declining viewership, the prevalence of social media apps, AI hype, and rising forms of alternative media.
That’s not even mentioning the return of Donald Trump, which this week has seen him making a $15 million settlement with ABC News, and suing the famous Iowa pollster Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register newspaper.
Globally, it hasn’t been a good time for journalists either. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, at least 80 journalists were killed in 2024, many of them Palestinian journalists covering the war in Gaza. In places like Hong Kong, public surveys have found that more locals perceive news outlets to be conducting self-censorship and, therefore, are more hesitant to criticize the local government. Trust in media has not been great around the world, the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism’s Digital News Report 2024 reported that the public’s trust in the news has remained at 40% and there has been a rise in selective news avoidance compared to 2023.
With the next few years being even tougher on journalists, I do want to share my ten predictions on where the media is heading for the next few years, and what they in turn, will do to you, the reader.
Legacy Media: Thankless Yet Important
It hasn’t been a good couple of years for the legacy media. Whether you are the New York Times, CNN, or the dozens of outlets generalized by the public as the “Mainstream Media,” chances are you’re not doing well economically. Since the US election, centrists to left-leaning news channels such as CNN and MSNBC have seen a dramatic dip in ratings, as more liberal viewers turn off their screens and tend to avoid the news. For others like the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times, subscribers have been fleeing in droves, many in discontent over their outlet’s coverage or the decision not to endorse Harris due to their corporate billionaire bosses.
Even before the election, legacy media has been attacked by all sides. Left-wing viewers criticize these channels for both-sidesism and covering important issues like a horserace, right-wing viewers criticize the outlets’ general tone of coverage that is biased against them. All of these do have merit when it comes to domestic politics, but the positives of legacy media on international news coveragecannot be understated.
Take the recent coverage of regime change in Syria, despite the benefits of social media, it is legacy news brands like the BBC and CNN that gave us in-depth coverage of what was going on in the region hour by hour. Let’s be honest, no podcaster or independent writer is going to have the resources and time to take the next plane off to Damascus and cover the event as it happens.
Does the news mess up? Of course, it does. Just this week, CNN confirmed the freed Syrian prisoner featured in Clarissa Ward’s report was an intelligence officer for the Assad regime. During the report, the prisoner claimed he was the victim of the Syrian dictator’s rule, and did not know about his fall when found in a Damascus prison. However, it doesn’t diminish Ward’s incredible work in Syria or in other war zones, because it is difficult to cover such events as extensively while doing it on the spot.
Welcome To The New Mainstream Media: When The Irreverent Dominates The Microphone
Many news consumers still latch on to the preconception of the mainstream media being the corporate-dominated, left-of-center news organizations that the far-left and far-right love to demonize as biased propaganda machines. However since Trump’s victory, and arguably the months and years since the pandemic began, there has been a new variety of media that has gone mainstream: Podcasts.
Politics podcasts have become more popular in 2024: From the UK’s The Rest Is Politics which has become a hit among domestic and global listeners, to never-Trump outlet The Bulwark’s election content (Including its flagship podcast) that has garnered millions of views and hundreds of thousands of subscribers. The Trumpian populist right has enjoyed its fair of political podcast celebrities, like Ben Shapiro of The Daily Wire and former Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly, which have often topped the charts in political and general podcast ratings.
But what is more influential are the non-political podcasts, hosted by internet celebrities like Joe Rogan, Logan Paul, and Lex Fridman. These apolitical yet widely popular podcasts are especially attractive to the “manosphere” and people who are not tuned into political events. Others such as Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris have leveraged their position as public intellectuals to gain massive popularity.
As The Economist put it, the election campaign has sealed the deal for podcast media, and it will play a more prominent role in the years to come.
As reaching audiences via the old channels becomes harder, catching people while they are being entertained is the new name of the game. During this year’s campaign Mr Trump sat for 16 hours of interviews with podcasters and YouTubers, according to a tally by “Colin & Samir”, a podcast. (Kamala Harris, his opponent, did only three hours’ worth.) Most of the shows, such as those hosted by Joe Rogan, Logan Paul and Lex Fridman, were not political or news-focused but general-interest programmes, followed by a young, male audience that is otherwise hard to reach.
…
Podcasters and YouTubers may seem to give the powerful an easy ride, with a chummy style that has made them popular with CEOs as well as politicians (Mark Zuckerberg, a punchbag for mainstream journalists, has sat for long interviews with podcasters such as Mr Fridman). But their political leanings are less predictable than of those older media. A study by Pew of “news influencers” with more than 100,000 followers found that self-described conservatives slightly outnumber liberals, but that around half identify with neither left nor right. Independent-mindedness is part of many influencers’ brand: Mr Rogan, who eventually endorsed Mr Trump, last time backed Bernie Sanders.
The decentralization of news media into individual podcast hosts has certain benefits: Wider audiences, less reluctance to talk about taboo topics, and the ability to book more prominent guests who are news-shy are certainly three of the top reasons many tune in to these outlets.
In journalism, with great power comes great responsibility. Whether you love journalists or hate them, most of them get the memo.
For the new mainstream media of online podcasters and YouTubers, they certainly haven’t. Instead of getting rid of biases that many in this new mainstream have lamented of its predecessors, they’ve pushed their own biases. Moreover, conspiracy theories are not only unchallenged, they are promoted and magnified in these spaces. Figures like Joe Rogan are infamous for peddling vaccine hesitancy during COVID and even suggested the horse dewormer drug Ivermectin as a COVID cure (Spoiler alert: It doesn’t).
Most depressingly of them all, it marks a great disservice to their audiences. Many listeners and viewers are not politically sensitive, and it’s not likely they would verify information and fact-check through trusted sources. In most cases, such audiences often listen to these views, believe them explore through their confirmation biases, and spread them around with their friends and family.
As Helen Lewis of the Atlantic put it, the new mainstream media needs to do better.
We cannot reverse the drift from institutions to individuals. Nor can the new partisan outlets be forced to adopt 20th-century norms. The Fairness Doctrine—the policy, repealed under Ronald Reagan, that required broadcasters to reflect contrasting views—is gone for good. We have to let go of the notion that “mainstream media” is a category reserved only for journalists guided by a professional code of ethics, a mission of public service, and an aspiration toward objectivity or at least fairness.
Many independent reporters do good and important work—I’m thinking of the YouTuber Coffeezilla’s work on crypto scams, for example, and Jason Garcia’s investigations into Floridian politics on his Substack, Seeking Rents—but they are surrounded by a clamorous sea of partisans who operate under new and different rules. Flaunt your bias, get cozy with your subjects, and don’t harsh their mellow by asking uncomfortable questions. “You are the media now,” Musk told X users as the election results came in. It was the truest statement he had made in months.
To the folks building their own platforms, to the influencers hopping on catamarans with politicians, to the streamers handing out Teslas to their guests—well done on your triumph. Welcome to the mainstream media. Now hold yourselves to the same standards you demand from others.
Left-Right Prominence
This is specifically about the partisan media you are likely to see online, not the legacy media coverage that tilts either side like MSNBC or Fox.
For the right-wing partisan media, they’re riding the red wave to profit. Just this week, Fox News announced it has finished the year with its highest share of the cable news audience since 2015, topping CNN and MSNBC combined. More digital outlets like the Daily Wire are also seeing its popularity grow, with its YouTube page already getting more than 3 million followers. Expect their success to continue during the second Trump administration, with them getting more access to the White House than ever before.
Pro-democracy and left-wing partisan media face a crossroads, something they might not be able to control. As noted before, since the election ended, many readers and viewers have decided to tune out of politics and clicked unsubscribe to many news outlets. Unlike in 2017, the #resistance crowd might not be as engaged as they were eight years ago, feeling frustrated and defeated that all their opposition ends up with no good results. That trend can, and probably might, continue through the next few years. However, when Trump gets into office, his policies and actions could galvanize the opposition like they did during his first term in office. Given the brazenness, cruelty, and stupidity of his administration’s likely moves, there is a chance that anti-Trump media will surge again, and possibly push undecided and Trump-curious voters across the line from the GOP.
Another interesting development could be pro-democracy media’s prominence in covering international affairs. Given Trump’s foreign policy moves will affect other countries with a more seismic impact than he did in his first term, and the attention many have paid to the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, audiences might be curious about what’s going on out there.
One example is the pro-democracy media outlet MeidasTouch, which has expanded its coverage to international responses against Trump in recent months. Ben Meiselas, the co-founder of the group, put it thusly.
Our goal is to expand our coverage gradually but forcefully on international developments, making connections between Trump’s reckless antics and those of other international despots, examining how their behavior impacts each nation and the world, and highlighting domestic and international efforts to counter these authoritarians.
As much as international audiences like to make fun of America for being illiterate in geography and politics, some education on global politics for Americans would help them greatly, and it’s long overdue.
Luxury Print
When’s the last time you read, or even held a version of print media? A newspaper copy? A magazine issue? Chances are you aren’t in the habit of reading and buying print. For some media outlets, it is understandable that they have cut costs on continuing print media. It’s expensive to make them and ship them, and not many people buy them.
Personally, it is a shame that not more people are getting into reading print. Setting aside how buying print is a better way of supporting journalism than clicking on a free article online, print media gives you far fewer distractions than reading something off of a screen. Based on my experience, you are far less likely to get distracted by an advertisement, a notification on-screen, or something that disrupts your reading experience. Our attention spans are already alarmingly low, reading print can at least train you to be more attentive and less distracted.
Interestingly, some news outlets have changed direction in print media. The satirist site The Onion has re-released print newspapers every month, Vice Magazine has re-started publishing its work in print, and the Atlantic magazine has expanded it’s number of issues it prints from 10 issues a year to a monthly publication with 12 issues a year.
For these outlets, expanding its footprint on print media is not only providing a better service for its customers, it serves a new purpose that it did not enjoy years ago. Instead of being a form of media that simply informs readers and provides profit for news outlets, print media can be seen as collectibles for wealthier readers to obtain.
Mel Ottenberg, Interview magazine’s editor-in-chief, told New York Magazine: “Print is a luxury item.” For some, luxury bags and beautiful jewelry are considered to be one of a kind and show something about their owner. When it comes to the more nerdy types, buying print news certainly reflects the luxury of journalism.
Subscribers Are King
This is something that’s connected to the point I made above for print media. News outlets are far more inclined to cater to their subscribers and use that as a jumping platform to raise profit. Of course, news outlets have been doing that for years, both online and in the before-times when people read print media for the news. Now, it has considerably shifted towards that side.
Digital outlets like The Bulwark, Zeteo, and The Free Press provide subscribers with more podcasts, articles, and in-person events as their main source of content. More mainstream brands like SCMP and CNN have recently added paywalls to their previously free content, which both act as a way to boost profit while generating free content for a wider audience when necessary. Some print outlets have decided to hide their issues like a paywall, only delivering new issues to subscribers, one example could be what National Geographic is doing to US readers this year. News agencies that blend the print and digital approaches want both formats to complement each other, digital as a way of getting the latest information and articles, while designing the print issues to be aesthetically eye-catching and more interactive than previous formats.
AI: Wreck-It Or Boost-It
I can see some eyes rolling here because the AI hype these days has gotten more irritating and excessive. Just this week, Time magazine unveiled its AI chatbot that complements its Person of the Year articles, as the outlet proclaimed “This joint venture combines TIME’s legacy of trusted reporting with Scale’s cutting-edge technology, setting a new standard for personalized and immersive storytelling. It’s more than an experiment—it’s a pivotal step toward charting the future of journalism.”
On the facepalm side of AI and media, the BBC had to make a complaint to Apple after Apple Intelligence falsely created a headline about murder suspect Luigi Mangione, claiming BBC News had reported he shot himself and committed suicide. At the time of writing, that has not happened.
As a cautious optimist when it comes to AI applications, there can be a lot of good using AI to complement articles. Using Time magazine’s example, if such services can be expanded throughout the outlet’s website, it is a convenient way to provide more context on what the user is reading, AI also effectively helps readers to learn more about a subject that they might not obtain from one particular article.
I can think of numerous ways AI can boost interactions with the audience, assist authors with writing their stories, and editors save time while editing. However, what could make or break AI as a useful tool in journalism are the bosses. If the executives and editors-in-chief decide to over-rely on AI for content generation, almost immediately, that over-reliance will lead to mass layoffs and many reporters might find themselves without a job. Further down the line, the imperfections of AI will hurt the bottom line of many news organizations. Like the BBC example, falsely generated articles not only damage a company’s brand, it sow distrust among readers in an already fraught news literacy environment.
Subservience, Obeying In Advance, Or Political Whack-a-mole
Trump’s second term has already promised retribution and legal prosecutions to journalists and the media during his campaign trail, and many of the now president-elect’s critics are worried about what might happen next.
Take the ABC settlement, it is a much bigger deal than you might think. For context, Trump filed a lawsuit earlier this year arguing that anchor George Stephanopoulos and ABC News defamed him. In the lawsuit, the defamation claim specifically targets the 10 times Stephanopoulos said a jury found Trump had “raped” E. Jean Carroll during a contentious on-air interview with South Carolina GOP Representative Nancy Mace in March. Not going too deep into legal details, the judge in the case said that Trump’s actions fit the general public’s definition of rape, even though the jurors ruled it did not fit the strict legal definition of the term. In addition, legal analysts were shocked the move happened in the first place, given Trump has repeatedly lost defamation lawsuits, including a $5 billion lawsuit against journalist Tim O'Brien that eventually failed. Moreover, it would have been an easy and winnable case for ABC News, unless they settled for better coverage or out of fear.
Regardless of ABC’s motivations, it motivated Trump to sue Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register, even though he WON THE FREAKING ELECTION AND IOWA BY MORE THAN A DOZEN POINTS! It is petty, it is vindictive, it is exactly the point.
Days after the election, Trump critics Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski from MSNBC’s Morning Joe program visited Mar-a-Lago to “restart communications.” Many have criticized the move, seeing it less as a model for journalistic integrity and balance, and more as a capitulation to kiss the ring.
No matter how you call it, subservience or obeying in advance (Credit to Timothy Snyder for this phrase), it is a worrying sign of what comes next in American journalism. I have often quoted The Bulwark’s Jonathan V. Last because he hits the nail right on the head on what a more subservient legacy media would act if they kowtow to Trump’s media whack-a-mole.
What is capitulation going to look like going forward? Mainstream news outlets aren’t going to start fluffing Trump. The capitulation will look more like this:
(1) They’ll try to buy protection by employing Trump favorites. That’s what the LA Times did by bringing in Scott Jennings. Media companies will hope that by paying people who have access to Trump they can persuade Trump to leave them alone.
(2) They’ll cut down on platforming Trump critics who are in DGAF mode. Instead, they’ll favor tame critics who stay in the realm of normal kabuki theater.
(3) They’ll start leaving things unsaid.
There is a chance that Trump is bluffing, just like he said “Lock her up” back in 2017. But this time, don’t dismiss his comments as mere political rhetoric. In the same week Trump got the ABC settlement and sued Ann Selzer, his former chief strategist Steve Bannon said “I need investigations, trials and then incarceration." Bannon added: “Should the media be included in the vast criminal conspiracy against President Trump and his followers? Should Andrew Weissmann on MSNBC and Rachel Maddow and all of them? We want all your emails, all your text messages, everything you did.”
To quote Charlie Sykes, who wrote this in his On The Contrary Substack:
The point is the fear.
The point is to make journalists and critics afraid of Trump’s retribution.
The point is to make them wonder if they are next.
The point is to make the price of truth simply too high.
The point is to saddle them with fat legal fees.
The point is to make them lie awake at night.
The point is to make critics, and reporters, and editors wonder if it is all worth it; to wonder why they should stand and fight, if the billionaires and the corporations who run major media outlets run and hide.
The point is to have their spouses turn to them and say, ‘We could lose it all.”
“It’s a concerted strategy,” writes lawyer Harry Litman, “and it is working.”
You have been warned.
Independent Media Gets It’s Glow Up
Linking to what Trump’s second term might do to legacy media, journalists on these platforms might find it more difficult, albeit they doing their best, to cover the issues and scandals in America and around the world. But at the same time, it provides independent media a chance to shine.
Substack has become an incredibly powerful platform for lifting independent journalists and commentators, despite the small issue of previous influence on social media and journalistic circles. MeidasTouch, Public Notice, and Popular Information are great Substack accounts that provide independent journalism. Recently, former CNN media correspondent Oliver Darcy’s Status News is a great outlet to get the latest developments in media.
The political right has successfully cultivated an independent media ecosystem that amplifies its voices and spreads its agenda, for the next few years, you can expect to see the same happening to the pro-democracy left.
Social Media: Still The Public’s News Broadcaster
Finally, a bit of a “duh” moment, journalistic institutions would be stupid to neglect their influence or underappreciate their value. Ofcom (The UK’s regulator for communications services) found that 37% of Gen Z commonly go straight to social media for the news and are much less likely than other adults to navigate straight to traditional news websites. In the US, Pew Research found that 54% of US adults at least sometimes get their news from social media. While in Hong Kong, the online media monitoring company Meltwater found that 32.4% of Hong Kongers get their news from social media.
Despite Elon Musk’s great work in ruining Twitter (X), it is still a platform many engage in for the latest information. Yes, the X algorithm has been more prone to spreading misinformation, hate, and Musk’s content than in the past, but it’s no excuse to leave the website entirely like what the Guardian did. Letting misinformation spread by itself without countering it to the best of your ability isn’t just making the problem fester, the conditions for misinformation worsen over time, until it creates an alternative reality for a particular political subset.
Alternative social media outlets like Instagram, and increasingly Bluesky, have been appealing to journalists for their slightly less toxic interface and content. Those platforms will be important too. For young people, TikTok is where the engagement is at, despite some countries planning to ban the app.