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.

A recent study, Do Journalists’ Political Orientations Translate into Partisan News Reporting? The Limits of Bias and the Limits of Counter Mechanisms, examines how journalists’ views interact with newsroom structures and professional norms and how those dynamics shape coverage. 

The findings point to a more complex reality than public debate suggests. Personal ideology rarely appears directly in reporting. Instead, newsroom processes and professional expectations shape how political news reaches audiences. 

Measuring bias in news coverage 

The research, conducted in Austria, combines content analysis with a survey of journalists. This approach links what journalists say they believe with what they publish. Austria provides a useful test case for many western newsrooms because its media system includes multiple political parties and a strong tradition of separating news from opinion. These conditions shape how journalists work and how editors oversee coverage. 

The study examines three areas where bias could appear: 

1. Subjectivity, when reporting includes personal opinions 

2. Party visibility, or how often certain political actors appear 

3. Issue framing, or how stories present debates through perspectives such as economic impact or social policy 

Together, these measures show whether personal views shape political coverage. 

What shapes reporting beyond personal ideology 

The survey findings show that many journalists place themselves slightly left of the center, a perspective shaped by education, location, and career paths. However, journalists’ political views show little connection to which parties appear in stories or how issues are framed. Across the sample, coverage stays close to the political center and even shows a slight lean to the right overall. This gap between personal views and published coverage points to other forces that shape reporting beyond individual ideology. 

The study points to newsroom structures as a key part of the explanation. Journalists work within editorial systems that shape how stories develop through review processes, routines, and shared expectations. These factors limit overt bias and encourage more balanced coverage. 

Autonomy also matters. Here, autonomy refers to the level of editorial control journalists have over their work, including how they select sources, frame stories, and shape narratives. Greater autonomy gives journalists more room for individual judgment, which can strengthen independent reporting but also increase the influence of personal perspectives on framing. Journalists who report less autonomy show weaker links between their views and how they frame stories. This contrast highlights how editorial oversight helps maintain consistency in coverage.  

Professional norms and the limits of editorial control 

Newsroom structure is not the only force impacting political perspectives in news coverage. Professional norms also guide how journalists approach their work. Many define their role through principles such as observing events, presenting facts, and helping audiences understand public issues. Journalists who strongly embrace these norms show weaker links between personal views and subjective reporting. Professional identity acts as a check on how far personal views enter coverage. 

The findings also show how representation and framing influence the reporting process, with some elements easier for newsrooms to manage than others. Party representation falls more directly under editorial control, since editors can quickly assess whether a story includes multiple political actors and ensure a range of viewpoints. 

Framing works in a different way. Even with the same sources, stories can present issues through different perspectives based on emphasis and context. These choices rely more on individual judgment than editorial direction, which makes framing harder to monitor. The sources remain visible, but the perspective can shift more subtly. 

This study shows that personal ideology does not move directly into published reporting. Instead, it is filtered and shaped through editorial processes, professional norms, and newsroom culture. For media leaders, the implication is clear: the integrity of political coverage is less about individual viewpoints and more about the strength of the systems that govern how journalism is produced.  

Editorial standards, review structures, and shared professional norms are mechanisms that sustain trust. That discipline is a competitive advantage. It distinguishes professional journalism in an increasingly fragmented and unverified information environment. 

The post When it comes to bias, systems matter more than opinions appeared first on Digital Content Next.

New research from the Center for News, Technology & Innovation examines how habitual chatbot users in the United States and India use these tools to stay informed. The study focuses on 53 people who use AI chatbots at least weekly and who follow current events somewhat closely or very closely. While the sample is small and qualitative, the research offers insight into how early adopters think about AI chatbots and how usage shapes attitudes toward news.

Rather than fully replacing news, habitual users describe using chatbots as an added layer in their information routines. News organizations remain a frequent starting point, while chatbots help interpret, summarize, or apply what users have read. At the same time, these patterns suggest that some functions traditionally performed by news sites, such as backgrounding or quick updates, may increasingly shift into AI interfaces.

Across interviews, three themes stand out: action, ease, and personalization.

Information that supports action

Most participants use AI chatbots to help them act on what they learn. They look for information that supports decisions, clarifies next steps, or explains practical consequences. This motivation cuts across countries and topics.

While action is a recurring theme, interviewees do not describe journalism itself as purely a tool for decision-making. Many point to news organizations as essential for surfacing issues, establishing credibility, and helping them understand what matters in the first place. Chatbots tend to enter the process after that initial exposure, helping users navigate complexity rather than define what is newsworthy.

Users ask chatbots how policy changes affect their jobs, finances, or immigration status. They seek explanations of tariffs, elections, government shutdowns, and visa rules in terms that connect directly to personal impact. Even when they start with a factual question, they often receive responses framed around what to do next, which users often describe useful.

This does not mean people stop reading news articles. Many interviewees describe a pattern that starts with news and continues with a chatbot. After reading a story, they turn to a chatbot to ask follow-up questions, request context, or explore implications. For higher-stakes decisions, such as legal rights or official procedures, they often confirm chatbot outputs with government or institutional sources.

In India, some users go a step further and ask chatbots to forecast outcomes in finance, politics, or even personal matters. While users often express skepticism about predictions, they still find value in seeing possibilities laid out clearly. In the United States, users tend to avoid direct predictions and instead ask which indicators or sources to monitor.

Across both countries, people often judge information by whether it helps them make decisions or understand the consequences. A few interviewees describe news consumption as an end. They look for information that helps them sort through complexity and understand what events mean for their own lives.

Ease matters as much as content

Interviewees consistently describe AI chatbots as fast, clean, and efficient. They value short sentences, clear hierarchies, bullet points, and summaries that strip away clutter. Many contrast this experience with some news websites that feel crowded with ads, popups, and competing visual elements.

Speed plays a central role. Users say chatbots save time by reducing the need to click through multiple links or compare sources manually. This matters most for tasks they find tedious, such as summarizing long articles, checking background details, or getting quick updates on ongoing stories.

Several participants describe chatbots as an alternative to search, especially for narrowly scoped questions. Instead of scrolling through results, they receive a synthesized response that they can refine through follow-up prompts. This conversational flow allows users to adjust depth and complexity until the information feels right.

Ease also includes tone. Many users describe chatbots as friendly, patient, and nonjudgmental. They feel comfortable asking questions they might hesitate to ask another person or even a search engine. While users understand at some level that chatbots do not think or reason like humans, they still respond to the interaction as if it were social.

Personalization and control

Personalization emerges as another key driver. Users like the ability to tailor explanations to their level of knowledge, ask for simpler language, or request more detail. Some use this feature to help children learn or to understand unfamiliar topics without feeling overwhelmed.

Long chat histories reinforce this sense of personalization. Users return to the same chatbot because it remembers prior conversations and preferences, which makes interactions feel more efficient over time.

At the same time, trust remains uneven. Most interviewees express limited understanding of how either journalism or AI chatbots work. Many assume that cited sources guarantee accuracy and rarely click through to verify them. When they do verify, they rely on gut instinct or the perceived stakes of the information.

Despite this, users show more patience with chatbots than with news outlets. When a chatbot provides an incomplete or incorrect answer, users often rephrase the question or try again. They treat the interaction as collaborative rather than final.

Where chatbots fit into news use today

The findings suggest that habitual chatbot users do not reject journalism. Instead, they look for ways to make information more usable, more navigable, and more responsive to individual needs. They expect clarity, context, and flexibility, especially when stories involve complexity or uncertainty.

As chatbots continue to shape how people experience information, they are also raising expectations that journalism must contend with. Audiences increasingly want news that is clear, contextual, and easy to navigate, even when stories are complex or uncertain. For news organizations, the challenge is not whether to compete with chatbots, but how to ensure that trusted reporting remains visible, usable, and clearly attributable as these new interfaces become part of everyday information use.

The post What chatbots reveal about how people actually use news appeared first on Digital Content Next.

The research defines sustainability as the ability to deliver on a journalistic mission while maintaining financial stability. The report identifies four foundations that underpin success: product and audience, monetization, operational readiness, and financial resilience. Publishers that strengthen these areas consistently outperform peers in profitability, innovation, and adaptability. 

The results show that independent digital-native publishers are thriving in underserved markets, while established regional and national players are modernizing through digital transformation. Across this spectrum, success depends less on scale and more on clarity of purpose, innovation, and culture. 

Small digital natives are rewriting the rules 

One of the report’s most surprising findings comes from digital-native outlets with fewer than 50 employees. They are thriving and most often operate with lean budgets and off-the-shelf technology. Seventy-two percent of these small publishers already turn a profit, and half report margins above six percent. Many focus on local or niche communities overlooked by larger media organizations. Their success challenges long-held assumptions that sustainability requires scale or legacy infrastructure. Instead, agility, efficiency, and community relevance are their competitive advantages. 

In the United States, lean models such as Times of San Diego and 6am City illustrate this shift in action. Both run profitably with small teams, efficient technology, and high engagement. 6am City operates 25 local newsletters reaching one million subscribers with an open rate near 50%, showing how focus and consistency can drive growth. The Post and Courier in South Carolina, meanwhile, illustrates how regional legacy outlets can modernize successfully through audience development and subscriptions. 

Digital transformation accelerates 

Across all markets, digital transformation defines strategy. Digital-forward publishers expect a 9% shift from print and advertising toward digital consumer revenue within three years, while the most profitable anticipate a 13% shift. Even in print-dominant regions such as Latin America and South Asia, publishers plan for double-digit declines in print income offset by digital gains. 

Many legacy publishers still depend on print as a financial bridge. While print revenue continues to generate profit, leaders use those earnings to fund technology upgrades, product development, and newsroom innovation. In effect, they are transforming a declining business line into an engine that funds their digital future. 

Diversification strengthens resilience 

Advertising remains an important revenue stream, but diversification now defines sustainability. Digital natives expect subscription revenue to rise by 5%, and the most profitable forecast at 7% growth. Leading outlets are expanding into donations, events, and information services. The report finds that digital-forward publishers with three or more significant revenue sources record higher average profit margins than those with fewer.  

The report shows profitability rises with direct audience engagement. Among profitable publishers, 41% have logged-in rates above 7.5%, while only 15% of unprofitable publishers reach that level. Logged-in readers are more valuable because they convert more easily to subscribers and enhance advertising through first-party data. As referral traffic from search and social platforms declines, publishers increasingly rely on registration walls, newsletters, and direct sign-ups to build lasting connections. Profit follows the login and publishers that own their audience data outperform those that don’t. 

Technology, editorial investment, and cash discipline 

Profitability also correlates with investment in technology, editorial quality, and cash management. Publishers with robust technology infrastructure and sound financial planning report higher margins and stronger readiness for the future. The data here shows that digital-forward publishers manage costs tightly while investing in customer research and product innovation. In contrast, some publishers cut editorial spending to protect short-term profit. This often leads to a “doom loop,” a cycle where weak products erode audience trust and reduce revenue. 

In addition, most publishers surveyed say AI is a strategic priority, whether to automate workflows, personalize content, or enhance reporting. Local outlets use AI to improve efficiency, while larger organizations employ it to differentiate their products. 

Although AI adoption does not yet correlate with profitability, it signals a growing maturity across the industry. In the United States, experimentation continues to expand, especially around data insights and multilingual publishing. 

The News Sustainability Project 2025 Report delivers a clear message of progress. Media companies are proving that sustainability is achievable when strategy centers on audience insight, purposeful innovation, and disciplined investment in people and technology. Their success depends on strong leadership, smart investment in people and technology, and a continued commitment to local journalism that informs and connects communities.  

The post Small publishers model sustainable media strategies 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.

How we deliver news can play a crucial role in why audiences return. Live, interactive news formats are more than a content style. They are also a tool for rebuilding trust, deepening engagement, and strengthening the bottom line.

Trust is fragile, but fixable

This year’s report confirms an ongoing crisis of trust in news. Yet it also offers a glimmer of hope. Encouragingly, 38% of people say they turn to trusted news outlets first, while only 14% go to social media. This reinforces what we’ve long believed: audiences want credible information, but they want it delivered in a way that fits the fast-paced, mobile-first world they live in.

Live blogs and real-time updates play a crucial role here. By showing how information is gathered, when it’s updated, and who is reporting it, live coverage inherently encourages transparency. It’s a format that invites accountability and provides a natural space for in-context fact-checking, source attribution, and even conflict-of-interest disclosures.

Süddeutsche Zeitung saw seven out of its 10 most-read articles in 2023 come from live blogs. They use the format not just to update but to explain, embedding transparency cues and structured fact-checks within its real-time coverage. FAZ achieved over 8x longer retention rates on live blogs than traditional articles: proof that real-time transparency helps retain trust and attention.

There’s also an untapped opportunity in building meta-coverage—live blogs that relate to the reporting process itself. Who broke the story? How was it verified? What questions are still open? During the 2024 U.S. election, Der Spiegel deployed a collaborative newsroom effort, where 33 journalists contributed to a single live blog. Readers could see not just the unfolding story but the multi-perspective editorial process in action. The approach blends speed, transparency, and team-driven insight in one coherent stream. This kind of behind-the-scenes work can help restore confidence in an age of skepticism.

Instant, micro-content

Another key finding from the Reuters report is the growing demand for shorter, more accessible formats, particularly among younger readers. At a time when many consumers feel overwhelmed by endless scrolling and algorithmic content streams, live blogs offer something different. They offer a coherent, time-stamped narrative that delivers key facts quickly, yet with enough context to foster a deeper understanding.

Unlike social media snippets, live blogs are built around editorial judgement. Unlike long-form articles, they’re agile and responsive. They give audiences real-time coverage of politics, sports, and community events on one coherent platform.

For example, during election nights, we’ve seen publications use live blogs not only to report results but also to explain shifting trends, share expert commentary. They also link to explanatory articles—all within one feed. It’s the ideal format for audiences who want to stay informed without being overloaded. A powerful example comes from Stears in Nigeria, which garnered more than 10 times the traffic on its live blog compared to its standard articles during the 2023 elections.

Interactive news as a differentiator

Today’s audiences don’t just want to consume the news; they want to engage with it. Interactive news is the answer. The Reuters report shows increasing interest in formats that allow for interaction and explanation, especially among younger and more skeptical readers.

Live blogs are ideal for interactive features like reader polls, Q&As with journalists and experts, and moderated comment threads, all embedded directly into the coverage. This turns passive readers into active participants and reinforces the human side of journalism.

This is part of a broader trend. For instance, Stuff in New Zealand regularly engages readers through polls and live Q&As. Its Met Gala coverage received over 1,000 reader responses, while Taylor Swift ticketing coverage triggered more than 400 comments in real-time. These aren’t just passive metrics; they reflect an audience eager to feel part of the conversation.

Sustainability and innovation

For publishers facing revenue pressure, these formats aren’t just good for engagement, they’re good for business. Customizable, brand-integrated live feeds open up new opportunities for native sponsorships, affiliate placements, and reader subscriptions. They also drive reader loyalty through habitual check-ins and notifications.

At regional German paper Westfälische Nachrichten, the paywalled soccer live blog achieved a 7.3% subscriber reach—a particularly strong result that demonstrates how high-value, recurring live formats can support subscription strategies. Whether it’s covering a local election or a global sporting event, live blogs are proving to be not just editorial assets but commercial ones.

A strategic roadmap for newsrooms

If there’s one clear takeaway from the 2025 Reuters report, it’s that format is strategy. As automation and AI transform the backend of journalism, publishers must also reconsider the front-end user experience.

Live blogs offer a versatile way for publishers to respond to today’s challenges. By prioritizing transparency and making editorial processes visible in real-time, they help reinforce trust with audiences who increasingly want to understand where their news comes from. At the same time, features like multi-reporter collaboration, easy formatting, AI-powered tools, and partner integrations make live blogs more efficient for editorial teams, allowing them to focus on what matters most: delivering compelling, real-time storytelling. They also meet the growing demand for bite-sized, easy-to-navigate updates, providing a clear, chronological narrative that cuts through information overload.

Crucially, live blogs also create space for deeper engagement. Whether through interactive Q&As, embedded polls, or moderated comments, they transform readers from passive consumers into active participants. And from a business perspective, they unlock new value through repeat visits, increased dwell time, and formats that are ready for sponsorship or brand integration.

Trust isn’t just built on accuracy; it’s built on experience. Audiences want news they can believe and a format that respects their time, attention, and intelligence. With the right tools, publishers can deliver both. Live, interactive news won’t solve all of the industry’s challenges, but as this year’s Digital News Report makes clear, it’s a critical piece of the puzzle, and one that’s ready to scale.

The post Live, interactive news: real-time trust and real-world impact appeared first on Digital Content Next.

I’m sure I’m not alone in turning to television, film and books to articulate the ways in which AI may play out in our industry. In this case, my mind goes straight to Star Trek. Data and the Borg offer two starkly different visions of what AI can become. The character Data was built to learn from and with humans. Data is curious and evolving, committed to understanding and serving the people around him. The Borg, on the other hand, are designed to assimilate. Their goal is not growth through understanding but domination through absorption. One AI is shaped around growth and human relationships. The other is built for control.

It is my belief that AI  – developed with purpose – can enhance human understanding, much like Star Trek’s beloved Data. At the other extreme, it will indiscriminately devour information, similar to the formidable antagonist Borg. It would yield results that erase our humanity, putting technology and efficiency above helping communities better engage with news media and understand the world around us.

AI design for good news

Audiences now expect access to large volumes of data and information delivered at high speed. What they’re looking for now is clarity and understanding to make sense of what they’re reading and seeing and how it connects to everyday life. Whether it’s a school policy or a change to housing codes, people are beginning to rely more on AI-synthesized insight and summaries pulled from whatever is most available, statistically frequent, and easy to read. That doesn’t always guarantee the information is complete, useful, or meaningful. And over time, these easy (often incomplete) answers shape how people view institutions, public decisions, causes, beliefs and even journalism.

When developers design AI tools to support clarity and accuracy, journalists can focus on the parts of their work that deepen understanding. They can focus on the work of the journalist: asking thoughtful questions rooted in real life, connecting facts in meaningful ways, and highlighting stories that help people see why something happened and what it means next. With the right tools, they amplify voices that often go unheard, raise questions absent from the record, and draw a clear throughline between past events and current developments—showing how decisions take shape, how systems evolve, and how stories gain meaning over time.

AI, much like the character Data, possesses a remarkable ability to process vast quantities of information with incredible speed. AI tools can deliver a clarity that propels opportunities for thought and innovation to move forward. We’re already seeing this in newsrooms today. AI can effortlessly summarize dense material, identify patterns that might otherwise go unnoticed in large datasets, and eliminate some of those tedious manual steps that often slow us down, like transcribing interviews or sifting through public records. This gives journalists more opportunity to delve deeper into their work and operate with heightened focus. Intentional AI design is truly about augmentation, providing a powerful partner rather than a replacement for human ingenuity.

Developing AI tools that serve the audience

Pew Research finds that people continue to view local journalism as absolutely essential. Audiences place their trust in local reporters to deliver accurate information. Many media organizations aim to reduce the workload for (or even the need for) journalists. However, some are beginning to build agentic AI that directly serves audiences. The prospect of creating tools that empower individuals to make everyday decisions with confidence is exciting. It directly builds on that trust. 

These tools don’t need to be all-encompassing. They simply have to be useful and intuitively reflect the ways people already seek out information. By design, these AI tools would deliver task-oriented insights, much like explanatory journalism, but do so in an interactive and personalized way.

For instance, newsrooms are already experimenting with tools that help residents visualize how a proposed school budget might impact classroom sizes at the schools closest to them or how a specific zoning decision could influence traffic and housing prices in their very own neighborhood. Another tool might, for example, transform a public health message into something clear and easily understandable. Even better, it might adapt to how an individual comprehends language or processes information.

Wise AI tool design

On the contrary, we must think carefully about how we use AI tools. If we apply them solely to speed up output or increase volume, we risk reinforcing the same pressures that have already strained the industry—pressures that replace depth with summaries and bury real insight in the shuffle. When systems treat all inputs the same, they strip away context and diminish quality.

The value of journalism comes from knowing what questions to ask and why the story matters. AI might spot a spike in illness at a local hospital. However, if a reporter doesn’t dig into who is affected, why it’s happening, and what it means for the community, the human story—and its impact—won’t come through. AI tools can support better access and make the work more efficient. But their impact depends on how they’re guided and who is behind the questions.

We’ve seen before how technology built for efficiency can still deepen harm when no one questions its impact. The cotton gin made cotton production faster, but it also fueled the expansion of slavery across the South. That outcome wasn’t baked into the machine, it emerged through systems that used speed and scale without regard for justice.

Similarly, today’s AI tools generate articles, prioritize content, and process vast datasets in ways that appear productive on the surface. But without human judgment, AI tools fail to explain why something matters, who is being left out, or what risks might follow. The strength of journalism isn’t in speed or volume. It’s in knowing which questions to ask, what stories need depth, and how to connect the facts to people’s lives.

AI is a powerful accelerant for journalism, not a replacement for the invaluable human element. As of today, It excels at streamlining certain tasks, which can allow journalists to dedicate more time to the core of the profession. This has and will remain human-centered storytelling, nuanced interpretation, and the exercise of sound editorial judgment. AI can efficiently surface the foundational “who, what, when, and where.” However, it is the unique human capacity for critical inquiry, lived understanding, and ethical reasoning that uncovers the “how” and “why,” transforming mere facts into meaningful narratives. 

The future of journalism hinges on intentionally integrating human ingenuity with technological tools. We can leverage AI for efficiency while unequivocally prioritizing human traits like interpretation, accountability, and narrative depth. These qualities remain paramount in helping audiences not just receive information, but truly comprehend its significance.

The post Putting AI to work for news audiences by design appeared first on Digital Content Next.

News literacy advocate Hannah Covington highlights this behavior in an article detailing her conversations with teens about conspiracy theories. Sixteen-year-old Andie Murphy, for example, deleted Instagram over concerns about AI-driven data collection. Once a regular consumer of influencer content, she now checks multiple professional outlets before accepting information as accurate. “I just couldn’t trust what I was seeing anymore,” she said. Her shift reflects a broader change in how Gen Z engages with news.

Recent 2025 studies reinforce this news trust trend

Research from Raptive supports this noted shift in Gen Z’s relationship with news and information. Their study finds that 49% of Gen Z actively verify online information by checking trusted, credible sources, while 55% say they trust content from established experts over influencers or peer posts. Notably, 39% view social platforms as less credible compared to open-web sources. These findings reflect a generation that is not only skeptical, but also intentional in its pursuit of accurate information.

According to the Poynter Institute, while teens may not frequently use dedicated news apps, they actively seek out reliable sources like CNN and the Associated Press during moments of uncertainty. About 20% of surveyed adolescents say they encounter fake news daily. However, many report that they turn to trusted news outlets when crises hit.

Similarly, Common Sense Media found that teens are increasingly wary of digital content, especially AI-generated material. In its 2025 research, teens express deep skepticism toward manipulated images and videos, with one respondent noting, “I already doubt everything I read online.” This mistrust is driving more teens toward professional journalism for verification and reassurance.

Peer fact-checking reinforces news habits

Covington’s reporting also highlights how peer influence reinforces this fact-checking culture. In school libraries and hallways, students openly challenge each other around misinformation. These real-time corrections help shape a community that values accuracy and critical thinking. For Gen Z, information vetting is becoming a social skill.

While teens may not engage with mainstream media daily, they don’t dismiss it. Covington’s interviews confirm that students return to professional news brands when a story feels urgent or emotionally charged. “If it’s big enough, I’ll check real news sites,” one student explained. That behavior underscores an important truth: for Gen Z, trust in established news sources and journalism often reactivates in moments of crisis.

This pattern aligns with Common Sense Media’s findings, which note that teens are eager for tools that help them navigate digital uncertainty. While skepticism runs high, so does the demand for guidance. Likewise, Poynter’s research shows that even teens regularly exposed to misinformation seek clarity from reputable sources during confusing or high-stakes events.

Gen Z’s relationship with news is complex but far from disengaged. They are critical of what they see, cautious about interpreting it, and selective in who they trust. When news matters, especially during confusion, fear, or grief, they turn to professional journalism for clarity. Their behavior suggests a desire not just for content, but for credibility. In a noisy and uncertain information landscape, Gen Z continues to seek out trustworthy news.

The post Gen Z is skeptical and selective of news – but still engaged appeared first on Digital Content Next.

This generational divide marks a dramatic shift in how Gen Z accesses information, driven less by traditional brand loyalty and more by personality, convenience, and platform-native content. For digital media leaders focused on long-term sustainability, understanding these behaviors is critical to developing meaningful engagement strategies. 

Research signals a strategic inflection point 

Reuters Institute’s Digital News Report 2025 offers a detailed look at generational dynamics in news consumption and preferences. The data shows that young Americans increasingly discover news through influencers and podcasters. Twenty-two percent of respondents under 35 reported encountering news via Joe Rogan in the last week. These audiences over-index on video platforms like YouTube and TikTok, where personality-driven content outpaces institutional journalism in both reach and resonance. To address this preference, the report encourages journalists to use their authentic voices to initiate direct engagement through video storytelling on social media platforms. 

Creators, not channels 

Social platforms now play a central role in Gen Z’s news discovery. Reuters’ report finds that Gen Z consumers in the U.S. are turning toward creators who blend news with humor, commentary, or lifestyle content. Figures like Brian Tyler Cohen and Megyn Kelly attract strong attention from younger audiences and show that Gen Z places trust in personal relevance. Among U.S. 18–24-year-olds, traditional news websites and apps rank fourth in importance behind social video, TV, and podcasts. 

This shift is not simply about platform, but about form. Video continues to gain ground as the preferred way of consuming news, particularly among Gen Z. In the U.S., news video consumption is at 72% in 2025 for all U.S. adults from 55% in 2021. Much of this growth happens on third-party platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram, not on news websites. Prioritizing video formats that are concise, authentic, and visually native to social platforms is essential to reaching Gen Z. These elements form the core of the Gen Z playbook for tone, pace, and relevance in news consumption. 

DCN’s recent research, How Gen Z & Gen Y Are Redefining Video Engagement, reinforces these findings with first-party behavioral data. The study shows that Gen Z strongly prefers video that is purposeful, short-form, and mobile-native—and that attention is earned, not assumed. Their engagement habits mirror the Reuters data: trust, relevance, and entertainment value must converge, particularly on platforms where news must compete with a broad spectrum of content. Together, these reports confirm that journalists who attract younger audiences must match their editorial voice with platform-appropriate formats, both in feed and in mindset.

Podcasts and personal connection 

Audio is also proving a powerful entry point. The report shows that 15% of Americans now consume news podcasts weekly. These podcasts increasingly appear as videos, giving publishers a dual-platform opportunity to repurpose content across YouTube and TikTok. For Gen Z, podcasts provide a sense of intimacy and connection, qualities that traditional news outlets often find hard to convey. 

AI and news personalization on the rise 

Because of the way in which young people seek out news (particularly in the era of AI-agents and search), personalization is becoming a focal point. This isn’t simply about novelty; it’s very much about functionality. The report points out that young audiences respond to tools that help them summarize, translate, and interact with news on their own terms.

Gen Z turns to the news they trust 

Despite a fragmented information ecosystem, the report reveals that Gen Z still values accuracy and verification. When asked where they go to check if something might be false, young people are still likely to name trusted news brands, especially public service media. They are less likely to rely on social media, AI chatbots, or peer comments when verifying information. This underscores an important point: trusted brands did not disappear. However, many media brands need to be reintroduced in formats that fit Gen Z’s media habits to become a regular part of their information diet. 

Gen Z’s relationship with news reflects a deeper shift in how trust, relevance, and engagement are earned today. Their preferences include short-form video, podcasts, creators, and AI-powered tools. These choices are not a rejection of journalism but a reimagining of how it fits into their lives. This generation still values core principles like accuracy and verification. They simply expect those values to show up in formats that feel personal, accessible, and native to their platforms. 

The post Get to know Gen Z’s news habits to build future audiences  appeared first on Digital Content Next.

New Pew research, Bluesky has caught on with many news influencers, but X remains popular, along with three independent academic studies, sheds light on how news influencers are navigating the shifting social landscape. The findings highlight a post-election surge in Bluesky’s popularity and underscore key design features that make the platform appealing.

Post-election Bluesky surge

According to Pew’s report, Bluesky’s use among news influencers nearly doubled in the four months following the 2024 presidential election, from 21% in November 2024 to 43% by March 2025. This growth was most prominent among politically left-leaning influencers.

News influencers on Bluesky are posting more now than they did at the start of the year with post volume rising from 54% in January 2025 to 66% in March 2025. X remains popular but shows a dip in activity from 92% of news influencers post in January 2025 to 87% in March 2025. It’s important to note that most news influencers on Bluesky are also on X and post there frequently.

Yet, despite Bluesky’s rising influence, X remains the top platform for reaching broad news audiences across the political spectrum.

Pew attributes Bluesky’s growth to its decentralized architecture, customizable algorithmic feeds, and emphasis on user-driven moderation. These features appeal to news influencers who feel constrained by X’s centralized and often controversial environment.

Independent academic research supports Pew’s conclusions. A study led by Gianluca Nogara and others, A Longitudinal Analysis of Misinformation, Polarization, and Censorship on Bluesky, finds that Bluesky maintains relatively low toxicity levels. It attracts a mostly left-leaning influencer base and scores high credibility in news content. The study also shows that Bluesky’s structure helps limit the spread of misinformation and encourages healthier discourse.

Another study from researchers at TU Darmstadt, Looking at the Blue Skies of Bluesky, further validates the findings here. While Bluesky shares structural similarities with other social networks, it provides distinct features, transparent algorithmic feeds, decentralized governance, and a strong emphasis on moderation. These elements, the researchers argue, drive Bluesky’s appeal among news professionals and digital creators.

Together, these studies present a consistent narrative. Bluesky’s focus on transparency, user control, and credible information resonates with today’s journalists, who want safer, more meaningful ways to engage with their audiences.

Although Bluesky is gaining traction, Pew’s latest data shows that X is holding on to its place as the go-to platform for news influencers. As of 2025, 82% of U.S. news influencers have an account on X, reinforcing its position as the leading channel for reaching wide and diverse audiences. This trend is echoed in research by Dorian Quelle and Alexandre Bovet, whose study Network Topology and Community Structure of the Decentralized Social Network Bluesky finds that while Bluesky supports tight-knit, topic-specific communities, X remains centerl stage for mainstream news and public discourse.

Leading social platform for news distribution

For many influencers and the media companies that work with them, X’s network effects, reach, and familiarity still deliver unmatched value for news distribution.

Pew’s broader findings reveal a growing appetite for news delivered by influencers across platforms:

• 21% of U.S. adults now say they regularly get news from social media influencers
• Among adults under 30, that figure rises to 37%
• 65% of these news consumers report that influencers improve their understanding of current events
• 71% believe that the news they receive from influencers differs meaningfully from traditional sources (Pew Research Center)

These research reports suggest that Bluesky’s rise signals a shift among news influencers seeking greater control, transparency, and healthier online interactions. While X remains dominant for broad news distribution, Bluesky’s appeal highlights the growing demand for alternative platforms particularly to distribute and engage with news.

The post Bluesky’s rise signals a social media shift for news influencers appeared first on Digital Content Next.