We all live somewhere, not nowhere, and appealing to and contributing to that sense of place is one of the opportunities in an otherwise very challenging environment for local news.
Competition for attention, ads, and $$$ is brutal, and I expect many local news media will continue to see revenues shrink, that some will close, and more consolidation (will latter help?).
1) More people say they are interested in local news than politics 2) Interest in local news more equal across differences in e.g. education 3) Local news often trusted, also across political divides
Even as the % who say they get news via Facebook continues to decline, a range of other social, video, and messaging platforms are growing in importance for discovery, many focused on on-site video, visuals, and more private experiences. Challenging environment for publishers 2/9
Generally, many of our respondents say they find it at least somewhat easy to tell trustworthy and untrustworthy news and information apart on various platforms, but there are real differences, with more concerned about how to navigate information on e.g. TikTok, X, Facebook 3/9
What might an AI-mediated information ecosystem look like?
Shuwei Fang @OpenSociety & @StructStories asked for scenarios. Mine, on interplay btw AI pragmatism, AI experimentalism, & AI incrementalism, draws on @risj_oxford research & more
My starting point? Public uptake will be one of the most important driving forces shaping the AI-mediated information ecosystem and, by extension, journalism & news media’s place in it. Demand is sometimes overlooked in discussions that tend to focus on actors on supply side 2/14
Extrapolating from public approach to previous digital technologies a likely approach might be "AI pragmatism", combination of (a) abstract concern about impact, (b) scepticism towards many of the institutions using AI, & (c) a practical appreciation of many AI applications 3/14
AI cannot reliably identify false news (let alone lies), despite what sales reps and boosters may claim. Too many false positives, false negatives, issues of bias, (let alone perceiving "entire meanings")
Because so much of the most potentially consequential misinfo, including false news and lies, is fundamentally political, there is real and perceived conflict of interests when govs' want to play role as arbiters of truth.
This is even more pronounced in low-trust contexts. 2/4
For years, experts have argued govs' and public authorities' most constructive role is indirect - convening whole-of-society responses and providing funding for independent fact-checkers, journalists, researchers, civil society
Second, what is crucial is not volume but influence. As @hugoreasoning and others have pointed out, attempts at mass persuasion mostly fail! . But one thing that often influence people is elite cues from politicians they support 3/7press.princeton.edu/books/hardcove… cambridge.org/core/books/nat…
Beyond inadverdently disseminating disinfo bcs of business-as-usual editorial practices, there are also parts of the media (e.g. some pundits, broadcast hosts) who are parts of what @sobieraj called "outrage industry" - even when working for news media global.oup.com/academic/produ… 2/6
Whether as sources (for news reporters), guests/subjects (for hosts and pundits), or important users and advertiseres (for platforms) - or just doing their own thing - some domestic political elites sometimes contribute to mis- and disinfo problems academic.oup.com/book/26406 3/6