While media companies tend to focus on periodic major events like new releases, fans want a steady stream of engagement with their favorite personalities, teams, and series across multiple platforms. Studies indicate that fans travel freely among formats in search of new content and experiences to satisfy their intrigue. The latest Digital Media Trends report by Deloitte explores how media leaders can engage fans more completely. 

The explosion of streaming, gaming, and digital media has given consumers unprecedented choice, but has also splintered their attention. As competition intensifies, media companies are doubling down on subscriber retention and audience growth. Feeding fan enthusiasm is essential to that effort – because fans aren’t a niche segment; they’re the majority.

The value of fans

About 80% of consumers self-identify as fans, according to Deloitte’s survey of 3,575 U.S. adults. That means they are enthusiasts of at least one entertainment category such as sports, TV series, films, gaming, or music.

Fans aren’t just a majority – they’re also extremely valuable to providers based on behavior. Fans spend almost an hour longer using media and entertainment daily than non-fans. They subscribe to more services (including gaming, music, and SVOD) – and spend more money on those services.

Demographically, fans tend to skew younger and engage more widely. They average 44 years of age (compared with 58 among non-fans). More than half (55%) of all fans, including 70% of millennial and Gen Z fans, say their fandom spurs involvement across multiple platforms, services, channels, merchandise, and events.

Lost Opportunities

While providers focus on new releases, fans often turn to social media to feed their fascination – via creators, user posts, and studio marketing. Half of fans say they discover new entertainment primarily through social media – that figure jumps to 73% of Gen Z and 68% of millennial fans. Yet this “social media first” approach isn’t being fully addressed by media companies.

While fans often discover content on social platforms, they frequently consume it elsewhere, splitting monetization across different services. This disconnect leaves media leaders with little visibility into fan behavior.

Over a third of fans (36%) report relying on fan or companion podcasts to stay involved with their favorites. This means leaving the main IP. Losing fans between new releases means providers spend heavily rebuilding excitement. Providers that can nourish these scattered audiences within their own ecosystems stand to gain in ROI.

Aggregation is key

Keeping fans connected off-season starts by aggregating fan experiences. Media companies don’t need to own every fan touchpoint, but they do need visibility and coordination across them. Embedding experiences like social feeds, podcasts, commerce, or games around their IP, even if powered by partners, would keep fans engaged within a single environment. Many would welcome this: about 40% (and nearly half of Gen Z and millennials) say they want all content related to their favorite IP aggregated in one place.

About a third of fans report buying merchandise related to their fandom in the last six months – a figure that increases to 37% among those who want fandom content aggregated. Fan‑focused bundles could package exclusive content, products, services, and experiences into personalized subscription or membership offerings, creating new partnership and revenue opportunities.

Keeping fans within a unified ecosystem gives providers richer first‑party data to personalize experiences, boost engagement, and drive revenue. With fans – especially younger ones – willing to share data for better personalization, coordinated touchpoints can turn the off‑season lull into a continuous relationship.

What about AI?

Can GenAI drive further engagement without alienating users? GenAI can help media companies produce content faster, personalize experiences at scale, and connect fragmented interactions into a unified destination. Research shows that fans are increasingly open to AI‑generated recaps, highlights, and personalized digests. Many fans report being open to AI‑generated ads, recommendations, and co-creating content, opening the door to more interactive experiences and revenue avenues.

Almost 40% of fans say they would accept AI-created content on SVOD, social media, music services, and in video games – if it is clearly labeled. 27% of fans say they may be interested in AI‑generated personalized digests about their favorite shows, and roughly a third of sports fans would be open to AI-generated custom highlight reels and commentary tailored to their teams and athletes.

But these figures reveal most consumers still have qualms. Media companies who employ GenAI in new ways to target content must develop clear terms of service around transparency and privacy. Reassurance around responsible use of GenAI is wise considering rising awareness of AI harms.

Consumers aren’t the only ones worried– media companies have valid concerns about losing control of their IP with open GenAI tools. Features that let users become creators can pose a risk to brand integrity and security. Embedding features inside their own platforms – with guardrails, tracking and moderation – may help media companies foster fan creativity while still protecting rights and capturing value.

The future of fandom

Fandom has evolved into a dynamic, always-on ecosystem. For media companies, winning strategies will reflect the full spectrum of fan behavior, from discovery to community. Those that capture and sustain that engagement within their own environments will turn fragmented attention into lasting relationships and real business value.

The post How the shift from audiences to fans drives media value appeared first on Digital Content Next.

Social platforms are the gateway to news for Gen Z

The research confirms that social and distributed environments dominate how young people encounter news. TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube now play a larger role than Facebook in news discovery. Only 14% of those aged 18–24 go directly to news sites, while 40% mainly access news through social media.

The implication is not simply about presence on these platforms, but about behavior within them. News organizations need to treat social platforms as a primary point of contact, which requires content designed for how those platforms function. That includes format, pacing, tone, and the expectation that users are encountering news alongside other types of content.

For young audiences, social platforms unavoidable points of entry. However, strategies that rely solely on driving traffic back to owned properties are less effective in engaging these audiences. The challenge is to use platforms to deliver great experiences independently, while creating clear pathways to direct engagement and monetization.

Format expansion requires deliberate choices

Young audiences are increasingly watching and listening to news, but this does not replace reading. Among those aged 18–24, 42% prefer to read news online, compared with 32% who prefer watching and 16% who prefer listening.

For publishers, this requires maintaining strong written coverage while also expanding into audiovisual formats. Short-form video, vertical formats, and platform-native storytelling are becoming standard expectations. These formats need to be developed as core editorial products rather than adaptations of existing content.

The report also points to the importance of presentation. Conversational tone, clear structure, and visual storytelling all contribute to whether content holds attention in competitive feeds.

Relevance and clarity drive news engagement for Gen Z

Many young people describe news as depressing, irrelevant, or difficult to follow. These perceptions contribute to avoidance, even though overall levels of news avoidance are similar across age groups.

This creates a clear editorial challenge. Coverage needs to be easier to navigate and more directly connected to everyday concerns. Approaches such as explainers, contextual framing, and “what it means” formats help reduce complexity. Including a mix of positive and negative stories can also address the perception that news is overwhelmingly negative.

Content priorities may also need to broaden. Younger audiences show greater interest in entertainment, wellness, science and technology, and practical information. Expanding coverage in these areas can increase relevance without displacing core reporting.

Personality-led content shapes connection

Reuters’ report highlights a shift toward personality-led content. Younger audiences often respond more strongly to individual voices than to institutional brands.

For publishers, this points to the need to invest in journalists as visible, distinct voices. Encouraging reporters to build followings, developing in-house creators, and collaborating with external creators can extend reach and deepen engagement. The emphasis is on credibility expressed through voice and perspective, not just brand identity.

Representation and trust require attention

Trust gaps between younger and older audiences are relatively small, and perceptions of fairness in news coverage are broadly similar. At the same time, younger people are more likely to feel underrepresented or treated less fairly, with this sentiment particularly strong among young women.

Addressing this requires changes in both staffing and engagement. Hiring more diverse journalists, creating youth advisory structures, and incorporating audience feedback into coverage can help close the gap between perception and intent.

AI is already part of the news experience

Young audiences are experimenting with artificial intelligence as a way to understand the news. Many are open to its use in journalism, particularly when it helps explain complex topics.

This creates an opportunity for publishers to develop AI-supported tools that improve information accessibility. Potential applications include personalized explainers, chat-based navigation, and features that break down complicated stories into more manageable parts.

Business models need flexibility

Lower brand loyalty and lower willingness to pay among Gen Z require a broader approach to revenue. Micro-subscriptions tied to specific interests, membership models built around community, and revenue from events or creator partnerships are all areas to explore.

The report also suggests that value may be tied less to access and more to participation and connection. This has implications for how products are structured and how audiences are engaged over time. Media companies must convert distributed attention into direct relationships, relevance, and sustainable revenue.

Younger audiences are not disengaged from news. They are engaging on terms shaped by the platforms, formats, and expectations that define their daily media use. For publishers, the challenge is to translate that engagement into something durable: relevance, trust, and direct relationships that extend beyond platform environments. Those that succeed will be better positioned to sustain both audience and business over time.

The post Gen Z values news, but expects clarity and relevance appeared first on Digital Content Next.

While the public generally feels comfortable with how they believe GenAI is currently used in journalism, concerns persist around its application to certain news-related tasks. Optimism about GenAI’s future varies by sector, with news and politics standing out as areas of skepticism.

The study also shows a growing adoption of GenAI tools, with trust in these technologies rising alongside user familiarity. As this trend continues, the advantage currently held by human news professionals may diminish, especially if news leaders fail to actively reinforce public confidence in the value of human-driven journalism.

GenAI in news and journalism

The percentage of those surveyed who are more comfortable with news produced entirely or mostly by human journalists has risen slightly compared to data from the previous year, while trust in news generated primarily or entirely by GenAI has fallen slightly. This indicates a growing preference for human leadership in news, presenting an opening for news executives to bolster public confidence. Across all six countries studied, a strong preference for human oversight in news prevails.

• 62% are comfortable with news made entirely by humans.
• 43% are comfortable with news produced mostly by humans with help from AI.
• 21% are comfortable with news produced mostly by AI with some human oversight.
• Only 12% are comfortable with content generated entirely by AI.

Comfort levels vary according to how AI is being used. Most participants are fine with GenAI use in checking grammar, spelling, and providing translation. They are less approving of use for research, writing, and data analysis. The public is decidedly disapproving of GenAI tools being used to rewrite content for different audiences, generate a realistic image when a photograph isn’t available, or create an artificial presenter or author.

Fortunately, people’s comfort level with journalists using GenAI for certain tasks is aligned with how often they think journalists are already doing so. It appears that most of those studied believe journalists are using AI in ways that they find acceptable, and few believe it is commonly used in the ways they would find most unacceptable.

While there are differences among the countries surveyed,news is trusted significantly more than the most widely used and trusted GenAI system, ChatGPT, in almost every country studied.

• In Denmark, 72% report trusting news while only 32% report trusting Chat GPT.
• In Japan, 60% trust news; only 31% trust ChatGPT.
• In the UK, 45% trust news; 20% trust ChatGPT.
• The USA and France have lower margins, with 36% of respondents from both countries reporting trust in news while 27% trust ChatGPT.
• Only Argentina reversed the trend – with 37% trusting ChatGPT- more than the 31% who reported trusting news.

It’s worth noting that ChatGPT was found to be the most trusted GenAI tool among survey participants. This means that the differences in trust levels would be even more stark if comparing news with lesser known GenAI tools.

Caution: Trust in GenAI grows with familiarity

Increase in regular use of GenAI tools is leaping rapidly. The proportion of survey participants who reported having used a standalone GenAI system such as ChatGPT rose from 40% in 2024 to 61% in 2025. Those reporting weekly usage nearly doubled in a year, jumping from 18% to 34%. So, if trust rises with use and familiarity, traditional news media could soon lose their edge in public trust when compared to GenAI tools.

Not surprisingly, younger generations were found more likely to both use and trust GenAI tools. 59% of people in the 18–24 age range reported having used any GenAI tool in the last week, compared to 20% of those aged 55 and up. However, that age gap is driven mostly by ChatGPT. Other GenAI tools, including Google’s Gemini, Microsoft’s Copilot, Meta AI, and Grok, had narrower use differences across age groups. This is probably because the later tools are embedded within widely used products.

Optimism about GenAI varies by use case

The public generally leans optimistic about the future of GenAI. Across all six countries studied, on average 29% are optimistic and 22% pessimistic about the impact of such technologies. However, the share of optimism versus pessimism varies by several factors. Pessimism outweighs optimism when it comes to GenAI use in news media, government, and politics. Optimism outweighs pessimism when it comes to GenAI use in health care, science, retail, and search engine efficiency.

• Only 18% think GenAI will improve their experience with political parties or politicians.
• 27% believe GenAI will enhance their interactions with news media.
• 37% believe GenAI will improve their interactions with health care professionals and scientists.
• 43% believe that GenAI will enhance their experience with search engines.

The lower levels of confidence in GenAI’s impact on politics and news suggests a perceived link between those areas. It also aligns with the stated preference for human-produced news.

The future of Gen AI and news

While this data provides some reassurance for news media leaders that the public values human news professionals, it also points to some areas of concern. As use of GenAI rises, so do comfort levels and trust in the utility of the tools, potentially eroding the advantage currently held by human journalists and producers.

To stay ahead and remain better trusted by audiences, news organizations should prioritize original reporting. They must differentiate their offerings from GenAI content and actively communicate these unique values to their audiences.

The post AI and news: Humans have the edge (for now) appeared first on Digital Content Next.

The report, by AI-native quantitative research platform Outward Intelligence, sheds light on the main factors shaping perception of poll reliability, including concerns around bias, objectivity, and transparency. The findings, based on a September 2025 online survey of 775 U.S. adults balanced demographically, provide valuable insights for media leaders to utilize towards improving both polling and communications practices.

Audiences still value polling

First, some good news. While reservations abound, the majority of those studied value high quality data, feel represented at least somewhat in polling results, and view polling data with at least some level of trust.

• Despite widespread skepticism, 65% of participants express at least some level of confidence in poll accuracy.
• 85% of respondents view high quality of polling data as either extremely or very important.
• An overwhelming majority (86%) believe polls represent their views “a lot” or at least “somewhat.”

In addition, most participants (83%) believe it is very or extremely important for leaders of media organizations, government entities, and businesses to heed public opinion when making decisions. Therefore, organizations that demonstrate quality public opinion research as well as utilization of results in guiding their practices could have an edge going forward.

Audiences lose faith

However, this research brings to light a variety of doubts and concerns. Nearly half of those surveyed say they often or very often question the validity of polling data. Over one third think polling has declined in quality over time. Certain issues seem to provoke even greater levels of cynicism:

• Election stress. 70% of those surveyed feel that election-related polls are correct only occasionally, or not at all.
• Artificial Intelligence apprehension. 83% voice concern over how AI might affect trust in polling, highlighting growing awareness around data integrity issues.
• Bias suspicion. 87% believe that organizations “spin” data for their own purposes – either sometimes (53%) or very often (34%).
• Underrepresentation concerns. Almost 90% of participants believe that polls leave out or underrepresent certain groups of people.

Over a third of respondents believe that polls are completely lacking in transparency. Almost a quarter of respondents don’t even believe that polls are conducted with “real people actually taking a survey.” Other notable concerns include inadequate sample sizes and unclear or poorly communicated methodologies.

Polling possibilities for media leaders

These findings offer media leaders the opportunity to shore up their polling methods and communications to foster trust. More transparency about how data is gathered, the representative nature of the survey pool, and the responsible use of AI in data collection and analysis are all areas in which organizations can increase their oversight and improve trust.

Based on this data, actionable steps media leaders can take to boost public confidence in polling practices may include the following:

• Improve transparency in polling coverage. Disclose methodology such as sample size, margin of error, and how participants were selected. Acknowledge what polls can and cannot predict, especially around elections. Minimize framing poll results to fit narratives, as audiences are sensitive to perceived manipulation.
• Educate audiences on polling fundamentals. Provide explanations that demystify polling processes. Use interactive formats such as infographics or Q&A sessions to show how data is gathered and interpreted.
• Address AI concerns proactively. Be transparent about how AI tools are used in data analysis and results reporting. Highlight the human oversight integral to editorial decisions. Consider publishing AI ethics guidelines for polling and data use.
• Champion methodological rigor. Partner with reputable research firms that adhere to high standards and ensure that polls include diverse and representative samples.
• Foster interaction. Invite audience feedback on polling coverage through social media, newsletters, or live forums. Use skepticism as a springboard for dialogue, acknowledging doubts, and responding with clarity.
• Position polling as a tool, not absolute truth. Frame polls as snapshots of sentiment, not definitive forecasts. Balance polling data with qualitative insights, such as interviews with individuals or community discussions.

Finally, demonstrating how public opinion is being taken into consideration when making decisions can instill more confidence in audiences going forward. Media executives who embrace these strategies can strengthen their credibility and trustworthiness. In a landscape where skepticism is high but demand for quality data remains strong, publishers who lead with transparency and integrity can deepen audience loyalty and differentiate themselves in the market.

The post The trust gap in polling – and how to close it appeared first on Digital Content Next.

Content spending by top streaming platforms

The 12 leading content players studied for the report – which include Disney, Amazon, Paramount, Netflix, Comcast, and YouTube- spent about 210 billion dollars on content in 2024. This represents a 10% compounded annual growth rate since 2020. Comcast led the way in 2024 with 37 billion in spending, followed by YouTube at 32 billion, Disney at 28 billion, and Amazon at 20 billion. The top 12 spenders were primarily U.S. based platforms and media companies.

Among the big takeaways:

• Investments in live sporting events continue to rise, while investment in scripted and reality programming has slowed.
• The rising popularity of free streaming platforms such as PlutoTV and Tubi is poised to accelerate content expansion.
• The future will rely on a blend of traditional high budget film and television series material with nimbler user-generated content.

The rising impact of user-generated content

User generated content, enabled by social media platforms, has become an essential part of the media content landscape and one that increasingly overlaps traditional studio TV and film models. A few takeaways:

• The rapid expansion of user-generated content is outpacing other content categories and that trend is expected to continue.
• User-generated content has become its own genre. As such, rather than replacing traditional TV and film material, it has become a critical part of a hybrid media model.
• The line will continue to blur between traditional studio models of financing content and social media and streaming platforms that enable individuals to profit from content through ads, sponsorships, and memberships.
• Fierce competition for influential individual content creators is likely to heat up in the future, requiring innovative collaboration and partnership strategies.

Partnerships at home and abroad

To remain fully competitive, major media companies will need to partner with individual content creators, as well as other media entities, technology companies, and telecommunications outlets. It’s also essential to interact effectively with global markets.

International audiences prefer lower price points and ad-supported structures. They also gravitate towards local content, which can mean “localization” of exported U.S. material to suit international markets. To be competitive in the global marketplace, media companies need to tailor their content and services to include flexible pricing and audience customization.

AI and data analytics influence strategic content spending

Data is the key to gaining insights and making decisions that drive return on investment. The ability to leverage consumer data to enhance personalization and target content investment wisely will be critical going forward. AI utilization will be integral to this process, with AI tools increasingly relied upon to automate, enhance, and extract insights from data.

AI isn’t just playing a role in data analytics, however; it’s also impacting content. This report lists “Choose-your-own adventure narratives, automated local dialogue, and ultra-low-cost formats” among the content AI could generate. However, the authors opine that, due to the importance of human talent and fandom, AI will augment rather than take over the content production process.

Smart choices for content spending

As media continues to evolve, content leaders face pivotal choices. The blending of studios, platforms, and creators, alongside the growth of ad-supported streaming and AI-powered personalization, is changing how content is made, shared, and monetized.

To stay competitive, leaders need to adopt flexible business models, invest wisely across formats, and connect directly with audiences. Success will hinge on spending smarter by leveraging data, technology, and partnerships to grow new value in the shifting media ecosystem.

The post As media content spending grows, AI and data drive strategy appeared first on Digital Content Next.

Gamification involves applying interactive game mechanics to non-game environments, such as news platforms, to drive user engagement and loyalty. Gamification can include more complex activities such as crossword puzzles, but also simpler interactive features such as quizzes, point collection systems, leaderboards, badges, hashtags, rankings, “like/dislike” options, and sharing, which may be more feasible for certain settings.

While most gamification studies focus on user experience, this one explores executive-level perspectives from media owners and editors-in-chief. Originally published in Journalism and Media, the study focuses on how Greek news media leaders are exploring and utilizing gamification strategies. The study’s authors conducted and analyzed interviews with a variety of digital media decision makers to uncover key trends and actionable insights.

Opportunities abound

Games are synonymous with fun. But gamification can have serious business benefits for digital media platforms, such as:

• Increased user time-on-site and repeat visits.
• Deeper user interaction, not just as a novelty, but fostering audience retention.
• Generation of analytics on user behavior, which can inform editorial strategy and content personalization.
• Appeal to younger, tech-savvy users- potentially without alienating long-term audiences.

Most of the media owners and editors interviewed perceive gamification as a promising strategic approach for increasing user engagement while enriching the digital news experience.  Leaders emphasized the need to uphold professional ethics while adapting established journalistic practices to accommodate the interactive and participatory nature of today’s digital media environment.

Potential pitfalls of media gamification

As much promise as gamification holds, some media executives express ethical concerns, such as credibility risks, especially among long-term users who value tradition. Some noted that older audiences may perceive gamification as gimmicky or inappropriate for news, possibly alienating core audiences. They stress the importance of maintaining editorial integrity and journalistic standards, especially in hard news contexts. Concerns about aggressive monetization were discussed. Finally, some leaders interviewed expressed concern about potential manipulation: the possibility that gamification could be used to prioritize clicks over informed citizenship.

Practical concerns also surfaced in interviews. Smaller newsrooms may lack technical capacity, design expertise, or budget to implement gamification effectively. Internal pushbacks from staff can occur, especially among those who view gamification as incompatible with traditional journalism values. Some executives question whether gamified features can be maintained over time without becoming stale or losing relevance.

Researchers also point out that while many participants in the study were able to recognize and assess individual gamified elements, they often lacked the training to conceptualize gamification as a planned, strategic approach. This indicates a need for professional development to help media leaders build skills to design, assess, and apply gamification in meaningful ways.

So, is gamification right for your media business?

Research indicates the importance of building internal buy-in before launching gamification innovations. Organizational resistance can hinder results, so ensure that all staff understand the value of proposed changes. Invest in training and be ready to assure stakeholders that ethical and practical issues have been thoughtfully considered to maintain integrity and mitigate potential pitfalls.

One caveat: the study data is drawn from ten in-depth interviews with media executives in Greece, including owners and editors-in-chief of Greek newspapers, radio stations, television channels, and online news platforms. While the interviews were thorough and represented diverse media venues, the research is drawn from a modest quantity of participants within a limited geographic area. 

Nevertheless, this study offers fascinating insight from those with real-world expertise in the field. The perspectives shared highlight the promise and complexity of merging gamification with journalistic practices. Digital media leaders seeking to innovate through gamification while upholding editorial credibility will find this research particularly relevant.

Research framework
The study uses a Normalization Process Theory (NPT) framework to analyze how gamification can be integrated into newsroom culture. The results point to a clear need for intentional design, strong editorial governance, and regular impact evaluation.

Research authors outline how frameworks like Normalization Process Theory (NPT) can guide adoption:
-Coherence: Make the purpose clear.
-Cognitive Participation: Get buy-in from staff.
-Collective Action: Assign roles and resources.
-Reflexive Monitoring: Evaluate and adjust.

The NPT framework can also be used to guide introduction of other emerging technologies.

The post Media leaders weigh in on Gamification in news appeared first on Digital Content Next.

User concerns grow globally

Recent research found low trust in AL combined with high support for increased regulation. Trust, Attitudes, and Use of Artificial Intelligence: A Global Study 2025, led by the University of Melbourne in collaboration with KPMG, surveyed over 48,000 people across 47 countries. The study found that most people report using AI regularly. And even more support AI regulations:

• 66% of people use AI regularly, and 83% believe AI will bring significant benefits.
• Despite this, only 46% of people globally report trust in AI systems.
• 70% of respondents support national and international AI regulation.

As international consumers are increasingly relying on AI, they are also expressing increased trepidation over issues of trust and transparency. Tech engagement, while strong across markets, is especially robust in emerging markets such as India, Brazil, and China, according to Kantar Media’s Global Digital Media and Tech Trends Report. The report analyzed data derived from 80,000 respondents in 37 countries. 86% of media users from India answered yes to “I try to keep up with developments in technology” as did 76% of those in China and 73% of those in Brazil – compared to 62% of U.S. respondents.  A large majority of media users in India (78%) agreed with the statement: “Artificial intelligence has had a significant impact on my daily life.” More than half of Brazilians agreed (52%), compared to less than half (46%) of U.S. respondents.

According to the Adobe 2025 Digital Trends Report, key issues around AI adoption include trust and the use of AI include balance, transparency, and data security.  The balance between innovation and trust is an ongoing challenge: both privacy concerns and governance complexities remain significant hurdles. Of the 8,301 consumers surveyed by Adobe, close to half (45%) claim to prioritize visibility and control over their data, while a third (33%) say they demand clarity on how AI is used to generate recommendations. As organizations move beyond pilot programs to scale AI initiatives, they must focus on clear disclosure and ethical AI practices to maintain credibility.

Trust erosion and AI adoption

A recent study by Thales reveals that consumers’ trust in organizations to use their data responsibly in the age of AI is rapidly waning. However, increased regulation alleviated some of the distrust.

• In 2024, 47% of consumers questioned whether companies used AI responsibly. By 2025, this concern rose to 57% – a marked leap in just one year.

• The 2025 global trust index found global trust rates stagnating or declining, with no sector achieving more than 50% “high trust” ratings. However, industries (such as banking and healthcare) and geographies with the most regulations had higher trust rates.

• Trust in news media hit a new low, with news organizations trusted by only 3% of consumers in 2025, a decline from 6% in 2024. Some of this drop was attributed to slackening oversight (particularly from social platforms).

• In contrast, Government services saw improvement, increasing from 37% trust in 2024 to 42% in 2025, an improvement possibly driven by enhanced regulatory frameworks like the EU’s Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA).

These studies indicate increasing awareness on the part of consumers about the risks inherent in AI technology. This underscores the need for media executives to demonstrate strong governance and proactive leadership.

AI data risk found to be almost universal

Consumer trepidation is far from unfounded. The 2025 State of Data Security Report by Varonis quantifies the data risk entailed by AI usage based on data obtained from 1,000 companies. Findings confirm that AI adoption is leaping ahead of risk mitigation. Among the findings: 99% of organizations have had sensitive data exposed to AI tools.

The report also indicates 88% of organizations evaluated had old but still enabled user accounts, which are potential entry points for attackers. The report also reveals that 90% of the organizations studied have exposed sensitive cloud data, and 98% were found to have employees using unsanctioned apps, including shadow AI. The study underscores an urgent need for stronger data governance frameworks in the age of AI.

As previously reported by DCN, a plan that includes transparency, balance, and education can offset some AI concerns. However, the conundrum remains that while most users claim to want transparency around the use of AI, revealing such origins can undermine trust. In addition to the very real risks of data exposure, AI use by organizations risks turning off consumers who perceive a lack of human connection and oversight. Media Pulse points out that human creator content, even when flawed, feels authentic and drives stronger engagement. Thus, AI tools must always be orchestrated with human creators to maintain community trust.

Global governments differ on AI regulation

The impact of AI adoption and data security concerns will likely spur increased regulation in many locales, so companies will be wise to get ahead of future requirements. The EU Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) – the world’s first comprehensive AI regulation – officially went into force in August of 2024. Designed to ensure safe, ethical, and transparent AI development and deployment across the European Union, it requires AI content and deepfakes to be clearly labeled by 2026. Failure to disclose can lead to legal penalties.

Other countries are likely to follow suit as the impact of AI-related data risks become increasingly apparent. Brazil and Peru are currently working on AI governance frameworks based on the EU model. Canada has established the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA), which focuses on transparency, accountability, and risk management for AI systems. China’s strict AI regulations include content moderation laws and licensing requirements for AI models. Meanwhile, India is developing a techno-legal approach to AI regulation. The United Kingdom leans towards a more pro-innovation approach, relying on existing regulators rather than creating new AI-specific laws. Australia boasts a comprehensive “AI assurance framework” at federal, state and territory levels.

Meanwhile, AI governance in the U.S. has been fragmented so far, with state-level regulations and sector-specific guidelines. Until 2025, a more nationwide approach to shaping AI governance seemed likely, but recent executive orders have been aimed at repealing AI regulations. As of this writing, The House of Representatives has passed the Budget Reconciliation Bill, which includes a 10-year moratorium on state and local laws regulating the use of AI technologies. This repeal of AI regulations, however, may be the opposite of what the majority of the public wants: More than half of U.S. adults (58%) say they are concerned that government regulation won’t go far enough in managing AI risks. Only 21% fear it will go too far, according to a recent Pew Research poll.

Different attitudes towards AI risks mean that a policy acceptable in one region might not be elsewhere. Media companies operating internationally may have to tailor AI-driven strategies to align with local regulatory expectations. The Global AI Regulation Tracker offers an interactive real-time comparison of how various countries are responding to the explosion of AI use with regulations, laws and policies

Given the research linking increased AI governance with customer confidence, being proactive about AI policy is wise from a customer service perspective. Whether or not their region requires it, media leaders will want to establish clear guidelines for AI use within their organizations to ensure practices that align with user expectations. Regulations aren’t just about compliance; they are about setting standards that align with public trust. Media leaders who responsibly integrate AI can gain a strategic advantage, with ethical AI use as a key differentiator among market competitors.

The post What media leaders need to know about AI risk and regulation appeared first on Digital Content Next.

Overall, an accelerating trend is the convergence of multiple platforms – from streaming services to social media. This presents significant challenges:

• Adapting to current generational media preferences. Different age groups engage with media uniquely across various markets, calling for customized strategies.
• Understanding international users’ media habits. Media trends and the pace of transition differ across countries, requiring flexible approaches.
• Harmonizing traditional and digital media. It’s essential to allocate investments effectively across established and emerging platforms.

Streaming audiences vary internationally

According to Nielson’s data, traditional TV remains the dominant choice among older U.S. audiences and some countries outside of the U.S., while U.S. residents in general, and younger audiences around the world, are gravitating increasingly towards digital media. Connected TV (CTV) reach has steadily surpassed live and time-shifted TV reach over the past few years, but total use of the television has remained steady since the first quarter of 2022, demonstrating its resilience.

The specifics vary significantly across global markets, however. Take Poland versus the U.S., for example. In the U.S., CTV devices and streaming services have become the dominant viewing method. Whereas, in Poland, traditional TV remains the primary viewing platform. Only about 8% of total viewing time in Poland was spent on streaming in the first half of 2024, according to the Nielson data. In the U.S., streaming accounted for around 40% of TV viewership during the same period.

Americans spent about half of their TV viewership on broadcast and cable combined. In Poland, the combination of satellite and cable amounted to almost two-thirds of viewing time. U.S. audiences spent 38% of their time on streaming- significantly more than Polish viewers at 22%. The data emphasizes the need for flexible global media strategies, with traditional and digital platforms coexisting to meet diverse audience preferences.

Streaming audiences vary across generations

As younger audiences worldwide gravitate toward digital media, older generations retain their preference for traditional television. In the U.S., individuals aged 2-34 spend more than 60% of their TV viewing time on streaming platforms. Those ages 50-64 spent well over half of their time on broadcast and cable TV as opposed to streaming, while those 65+ spent fully 75% of their viewing time on broadcast and cable TV combined, and less than a quarter on streaming media.  

In Thailand, a similar pattern prevails, with adults over 40 preferring TV to social media or video streaming platforms. Gen Z shows the lowest preference for traditional TV viewership of all age groups in Thailand (47%), favoring digital alternatives, whereas the 55+ demographic exhibits the highest linear TV viewership (62%), according to Nielson’s data.

However, it’s important to note that older viewers generally watch significantly more total TV compared to younger audiences. This holds true in the U.S. as well as Thailand, where all types of media have a greater reach among older audiences. According to a recent Deloitte report, Boomers spent an average of 3.5 hours per day watching TV shows and movies on streaming video services, cable, or live-streaming TV, while Gen Z audiences spent about 2.1 hours per day on those activities.

This dynamic has implications not only for how content is consumed but also how it is created, delivered, and marketed. As digital natives grow up, they are driving a new era of on-demand streaming, mobile media consumption, and personalized content algorithms. Meanwhile, the media industry must continue to accommodate older people, who remain loyal to traditional formats and are often heavy consumers of media. For example, older generations are more likely to keep their cable or satellite TV subscriptions long-term, while Generation Z and millennial cable subscribers are more than twice as likely to indicate that they plan to terminate their subscriptions within the year, according to Deloitte’s 2025 Digital Media Trends report.

Why some audiences still prefer linear TV

Linear TV retains some advantages in addition to the loyalty of older and international audiences, as pointed out by Vijya Amirtham on VPlayed. It is conducive to live events, such as sports, games, and award shows, which have massive appeal to large audiences. Linear TV also enables targeting by advertisers based on channel, genre, and airtime. Viewers tend to find TV ads more credible, especially on trusted channels, and are conditioned to expect ads when watching linear TV. Amirtham also asserts linear TV audiences “are predominantly associated with affluent groups.”  

Boundaries between traditional TV and digital media are blurring with the evolution of Cloud TV and Over-the-Top-Television (OTT)- traditional TV content such as series and movies watched over the internet. These technologies are enticing viewers by combining the benefits of linear TV and more fluid digital mediums that offer on-demand viewing and are sometimes free of traditional ads. Amirtham recommends developing a linear TV app as one method for media leaders to expand and enhance audience engagement.

Maintaining and growing audiences

As DCN previously reported, younger generations are gravitating towards streaming services and social platforms and away from traditional TV. However, while media companies keep a keen eye on Gen Z trend-shapers, it is also wise to accommodate mature and international audiences, who are loyal and heavy consumers of traditional media formats.

For media leaders, it’s still too soon to abandon linear—if the goal is to reach the widest audience possible. Instead, deliver integrated solutions that merge linear TV and streaming assets, while working to enhance cross-platform integration. Effective strategies across age groups, international markets, and media platforms will depend on accurate measurement, outreach, and partnerships. The growing convergence of platforms invites opportunities to cultivate deeper connections with viewers around the world.

The post Who’s streaming and how to appeal to audiences appeared first on Digital Content Next.

In the financial world, negative media coverage heightens perceived risk, which impacts investor sentiment and sovereign bond yields. The research findings indicate that news coverage of African elections focuses disproportionately on negative issues such as violence and election fraud when compared to non-African countries with similar risk profiles. For example, the term “violence” was found to be highly associated with Africa in media headlines – especially in election coverage – even when the content of the article didn’t warrant it. Western media also tends to perpetuate misunderstandings and oversimplifications, such as referring to Africa as a monolith, neglecting to convey the complexities of individual African countries and events.

Global Africa media bias revealed

The study included a comparison of news coverage from seven global media giants: Al Jazeera, the BBC, CNN, Bloomberg, Financial Time, Reuters, and The Economist, all of which are commonly used by foreign investors to keep abreast of international economic and political news. The material covering African countries was compared to that of non-African countries with similar risk profiles.

Negative sentiment in global media reports was found to be more prevalent in articles about African countries during elections when contrasted with comparable Asian countries during elections, even among countries with similar political risk scores.

• An astonishing 88% of content about Kenya and 69% about Nigeria demonstrated negative bias, compared with 48% of content on Malasia, which has a similar medium risk profile.
• Egypt’s coverage was more than twice as likely to be negative (66%) than Thailand’s (32%), even though both countries are classified as high-risk.

Overall negative bias was still present but reduced when a greater variety of media outlets were added to the equation, highlighting the importance of a diverse media landscape.

Election headlines and buzz words

Media headlines pertaining to African elections were often found to contain negative words, even when the text of the article didn’t align with the negativity of the headline, clearly demonstrating an Africa bias. The word “violence” or “violent” appeared much more often in headlines about Kenyan elections (5.8%), and Nigerian elections (4.4%) than in coverage of elections in Malaysia (.1%), Thailand (0%) and Denmark (0%).

The report found a significant increase in negative bias when covering elections in African countries, compared to elections in non-African countries with similar political risk profiles. For example:

• Use of the word “rigged”, or “rigging” appeared in 16% of the articles about Kenyan elections, but in 2% of those about Malaysia and 0% of those about Denmark.
• The word “corruption” or “corrupt” was found in 43% of the articles about South African elections and 28% of the articles covering Nigerian elections, compared with only 2% of those about Denmark’s elections and 20% about Thailand’s elections.

News around election periods was analyzed because that content is most likely to be covered by global media outlets.

The financial cost of media bias

Media representation impacts investor sentiment and perceptions of risk, influencing investment decisions and borrower interest rates.  Comparing differences in bond yields and media representation between countries with similar political risk profiles reveals the disadvantage that negative media slant confers upon African countries. For example, while both Egypt and Thailand are considered high-risk, Egypt’s bond yields tend to be around 15% compared with Thailand’s 2.5%. The difference translates into significantly higher repayment costs.

Bond yields were disproportionately high even for low-risk African countries compared to their non-African counterparts. For example, South Africa and Denmark both rank as low in political risk, yet South Africa’s average quarterly bond yields range between 8.3% and 8.5% while Denmark’s range from 0.5% to negative 0.2%. Report authors calculate that if the difference in negative media sentiment was adjusted, South African bond yields would decrease by 0.05 %, resulting in big savings on interest repayments for the country.

The media can improve it’s Africa coverage

The New Global Media Index for Africa, produced by Africa No Filter, The Africa Center, and University of Cape Town, investigated a thousand news articles from twenty leading global media outlets. The researchers found that many of shortcomings noted in the report can be mitigated by acting on the following goals:

• Broader Representation: Interview more diverse sources, including ordinary African citizens, women, and people from marginalized groups. Current coverage focuses on powerful men and elites.
• Geographic Scope: Encompass a wider range of African countries. Many organizations treat the African continent as a monolith, hindering understanding of individual countries and narratives.
• Topic Diversity: Provide greater balance by covering the arts, culture, innovation, technology, and positive development.
• Depth of coverage: Delve deeper into narratives to better inform audiences about Africa’s complexities.
• Critical Self-Examination: Regularly assess news practices and content to foster more accurate and nuanced coverage of African countries.

How to improve election coverage

Due to heightened news bias around elections, Africa No Filter released How to Write About an African Election: A Guide. The guide encourages media organizations to engage in more complex and nuanced coverage around elections by exploring unique angles, including stories of human interest and grassroots mobilization. Key take-aways:

• Move away from the old “war room” approach to election coverage, which relies too heavily on official announcements and pre-scheduled events. Instead, notice stories of civic activity, peaceful government transitions, and democratic advancements.
• Practice solutions journalism by highlighting positive initiatives, innovations, and successes.
• Engage with the youth. Africa has the youngest population in the world. 78% of new voter registrations in South Africa are people aged 16 to 29, according to the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), debunking the idea that young people are disengaged from politics. The guide suggests amplifying the voices of young citizens, as well as engaging them with platforms and formats they prefer.

The takeaway

The good news is that coverage of African countries has improved over the past 20 years, according to The Cost of Media Stereotypes to Africa, trending towards more positive tone and content. However, global media still tend to emphasize articles about poverty, problematic leadership, disease, corruption, and conflicts when reporting on events in African countries.

Considering the new data, it’s critical for media leaders to raise awareness of the tendency toward negative bias when it comes to coverage of African countries. In addition to the impact on bond yields, it is likely that negative press also has an impact on African tourism, development funding, foreign direct investment, and other potential revenue.

The post It’s time to recognize and change the media’s costly Africa bias appeared first on Digital Content Next.

Over 84% of the 601 state-administered media entities in 107 countries studied by State Media Monitor showed a lack of editorial independence. This represents a 1% increase from the previous year, highlighting the persistence of state control over media.

State Media Monitor defines state-controlled media as media outlets “that are wholly owned and operated by the government, which has a big say in their editorial agenda.” On the opposite end of the scale, Independent public media are defined as public service media whose funding and governing mechanisms are designed to insulate them from government interference. In between those extremes are media outlets operating under various levels of government influence, ranging from independent state funded or managed media to captured public or private media outlets.

The analysis indicates many countries are competing for control of the global news ecosystem. The US, the UK, France, China, Russia, and Turkey, are expanding media empires beyond their own borders, vying for international news dominance. Some countries such as China are funding or otherwise supporting news media outlets beyond their borders, making their overall influence difficult to trace and measure.

Key findings of the State Media Monitor report

State-controlled media grows

About 65% of monitored outlets fall under the state-controlled model, where the government directly influences editorial agendas.

In 2024, 31 outlets in Europe operate under complete state control, an increase from 24 in the prior year.

Independent media declines

The percentage of privately owned media outlets captured by the government increased in 2024 for Europe (19%) and Middle East and North Africa (14%).
Public broadcasting in Slovakia, Thailand, South Korea, and several regions in Spain have lost editorial independence.

Political influence

Right-wing political groups in Europe, including those in Austria and the UK, pose ongoing threats to independent media. Meanwhile, media outlets in countries such as Thailand and South Korea operate under significant government censorship.

State-run media in authoritarian regimes such as those in China and Russia are extending operations internationally, significantly influencing global narratives.

Political power and media in 2024

Elections were held in more than 50 nations in 2024, heating up competition for control of the political narrative. State Media Monitor reports that less than a quarter of countries which held elections in 2024 have independent state and public media with editorial freedom, substantially risking the integrity of election processes. Several global conflicts and wars intensified government involvement in media and fueled vying propaganda narratives. Private businesses and political actors also compete for media sway.

Troublingly, public service media is declining around the global. Europe, which typically boasts a plethora of independent outlets, is facing growing pressure from political parties aiming to undermine public service media. European state-controlled media outlets are on the rise, with private media outlets in Hungary, Serbia, and Turkey falling under significant government control. Meanwhile, no purely independent public media outlets were identified in Eurasia, sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), or Oceania.

State and public media under state control in 2024

The percentage of media outlets under absolute government control compared to the total number of state and public media outlets overall in the region were reported as follows.

• Europe – 26%, an increase from 21% in 2023
• Eurasia – 83%, an increase from 80% in 2023
• Sub-Sahara Africa – 86%, a decrease from 87% in 2023
• Middle East and North Africa – 62%, an increase from 60% in 2023
• Asia – 74% – a decrease from 75% in 2023
• Latin America and the Caribbean – 77%, the same as 2023
• North American held steady at 0%, the same as 2023.

Consequences of state-owned media dominance

There is no getting around the dire consequences posed by government domination of media. The increase in government control indicated in the State Media Monitor report jeopardizes journalistic integrity, the objectivity of news reporting, and diversity in the media landscape. An increase in state-controlled media elevates dangerous propaganda throughout the world.

However, there are a few bright spots. The newly elected government in Poland released publisher Polska Press from state control. The Dominican Republic’s Corporación State de Radio y Televisión (CERTV) has also demonstrated significant improvement in independent editorial coverage over the past year. The Labour Party victory in the UK bodes well for the BBC. These changes suggest that shifts in political leadership can positively impact media independence.

It remains critical that independent media outlets help raise awareness of the need to protect news and information from government control. Media organizations can help advocate for reforms and protections for independent journalism. Safeguarding a diverse information landscape that fosters robust democratic discourse should be a priority for news organizations and a concerned public.

The post Government control of media on the rise globally appeared first on Digital Content Next.