This year may be the year that journalists, scholars, and foundation-types squarely face a problem that’s largely escaped notice: what I’ll call “media gerrymandering.”
Political gerrymandering leaves many places locked into one-party control. If a district is solidly Republican, let’s say, local Democrats have little incentive to invest in efforts to listen to, respond to, or to put up much of a fight to claim they can better represent the people in that distinct. Increasingly, a similar dynamic is playing out in the way media organizations pursue or ignore demographically and politically segmented audiences.
Commercial news markets no longer incentivize outlets to pursue broad and cross-partisan audiences; they push instead toward loyal and relatively homogeneous ones. This means that many of today’s most well-funded, mainstream news organizations pour resources and efforts into pursuing audiences profiled as affluent, highly educated, and, at least in many cases, Democrat-leaning (if only because Democratic audiences are perceived as easier to reach). Conservative institutions, by contrast, pour resources into courting audiences profiled as conservatives or potential conservatives. The under-resourced group of openly left media target audiences profiled as left and, in most cases, highly educated. This educational skew is worth noting because conservatives have invested in building tabloid media brands while their opponents have not kept pace in this genre.
Still, across the board, the current media landscape (including the digital startups so frequently lauded as lodestars of innovation) favors wealthier and more highly-educated audiences. One fine-grained analysis comes from a 2015 study that explored news inequities across the media economies of three New Jersey communities. Researchers found the wealthiest, most highly educated, and most white community had 23 times as many stories produced per capita than the least wealthy community with the fewest college graduates and smallest portion of whites.
If you think media markets simply respond to consumer demand, you might not be troubled by news segmentation along partisan or demographic lines. You may think people seek out media that reflects their pre-existing interests and biases — so inequities and partisan divides must be driven by demand forces external to media institutions. If social groups are ideologically fixed — say, rural whites are inherently conservative, or college-educated women inherently progressive, or people without a college education are simply not interested in political news — media gerrymandering might not matter much so much.
But what if political identities and interests are more fluid? Consider an analogy. Let’s imagine — and we hardly need to push deep into the land of make-believe here — that prestigious colleges focus their recruiting efforts overwhelmingly on students from affluent, highly-educated communities. And let’s say they curate an atmosphere most conducive to the tastes and proclivities of young people coming from such backgrounds. Then these institutions serve to perpetuate and amplify class stratification, with or without discriminatory admissions practices.
As news organizations pursue segmented audiences and calibrate the tone of their coverage to suit their niche, we’re seeing something similar in terms of escalating division and stratification.
The familiar model for news outlets trying to reach broad news audiences comes from the early-to-mid-20th century. This “high modern” journalism centered on claims of objectivity, and it was predicated on a vision of an undifferentiated mass audience. News outlets could claim to be “for the people” without needing to specify in much detail who “the people” were supposed to be. In actuality, this meant a reporting force composed largely of educated white men, prioritizing the interests of audiences most similar to them, while staking a claim to represent the American people at large.
Claims to represent a featureless and universal public interest face far more skepticism today. If news organizations want to reach popular and heterogeneous audiences, they have to think in terms of building diverse coalitions, not a mass audience. They need to fight for perceived legitimacy from each group making up that coalition.
Much of that fight will hinge on how successfully news organizations can make the case to represent each coalitional partner. How do different communities see themselves reflected in the media workforce? Do they see their community playing a dignified role in journalism’s stories of public life? Do they feel journalists respect and care about people like them? Grappling with these questions will lead to alternatives to the high modern model of a press that stakes its legitimacy only on claims to be an enlightened trustee looking out for everyone’s best interests.
There’s no easy way out of media gerrymandering. It’s not premised primarily on the biases of individual journalists or even on the prerogative of particular organizations. It’s baked into the pull of major revenue sources, whether those be digital advertising, subscriptions, and or even the impact metrics often used to evaluate foundation-funded news projects. Confronting it will require deep thought and debate about media policy that can make news institutions less dependent on market forces. This will also require creative experimentation, searching for ways to engage and earn the trust of diverse coalitions.
Let’s hope these efforts start now — with gusto!
Anthony Nadler is an associate professor of media and communication studies at Ursinus College.
This year may be the year that journalists, scholars, and foundation-types squarely face a problem that’s largely escaped notice: what I’ll call “media gerrymandering.”
Political gerrymandering leaves many places locked into one-party control. If a district is solidly Republican, let’s say, local Democrats have little incentive to invest in efforts to listen to, respond to, or to put up much of a fight to claim they can better represent the people in that distinct. Increasingly, a similar dynamic is playing out in the way media organizations pursue or ignore demographically and politically segmented audiences.
Commercial news markets no longer incentivize outlets to pursue broad and cross-partisan audiences; they push instead toward loyal and relatively homogeneous ones. This means that many of today’s most well-funded, mainstream news organizations pour resources and efforts into pursuing audiences profiled as affluent, highly educated, and, at least in many cases, Democrat-leaning (if only because Democratic audiences are perceived as easier to reach). Conservative institutions, by contrast, pour resources into courting audiences profiled as conservatives or potential conservatives. The under-resourced group of openly left media target audiences profiled as left and, in most cases, highly educated. This educational skew is worth noting because conservatives have invested in building tabloid media brands while their opponents have not kept pace in this genre.
Still, across the board, the current media landscape (including the digital startups so frequently lauded as lodestars of innovation) favors wealthier and more highly-educated audiences. One fine-grained analysis comes from a 2015 study that explored news inequities across the media economies of three New Jersey communities. Researchers found the wealthiest, most highly educated, and most white community had 23 times as many stories produced per capita than the least wealthy community with the fewest college graduates and smallest portion of whites.
If you think media markets simply respond to consumer demand, you might not be troubled by news segmentation along partisan or demographic lines. You may think people seek out media that reflects their pre-existing interests and biases — so inequities and partisan divides must be driven by demand forces external to media institutions. If social groups are ideologically fixed — say, rural whites are inherently conservative, or college-educated women inherently progressive, or people without a college education are simply not interested in political news — media gerrymandering might not matter much so much.
But what if political identities and interests are more fluid? Consider an analogy. Let’s imagine — and we hardly need to push deep into the land of make-believe here — that prestigious colleges focus their recruiting efforts overwhelmingly on students from affluent, highly-educated communities. And let’s say they curate an atmosphere most conducive to the tastes and proclivities of young people coming from such backgrounds. Then these institutions serve to perpetuate and amplify class stratification, with or without discriminatory admissions practices.
As news organizations pursue segmented audiences and calibrate the tone of their coverage to suit their niche, we’re seeing something similar in terms of escalating division and stratification.
The familiar model for news outlets trying to reach broad news audiences comes from the early-to-mid-20th century. This “high modern” journalism centered on claims of objectivity, and it was predicated on a vision of an undifferentiated mass audience. News outlets could claim to be “for the people” without needing to specify in much detail who “the people” were supposed to be. In actuality, this meant a reporting force composed largely of educated white men, prioritizing the interests of audiences most similar to them, while staking a claim to represent the American people at large.
Claims to represent a featureless and universal public interest face far more skepticism today. If news organizations want to reach popular and heterogeneous audiences, they have to think in terms of building diverse coalitions, not a mass audience. They need to fight for perceived legitimacy from each group making up that coalition.
Much of that fight will hinge on how successfully news organizations can make the case to represent each coalitional partner. How do different communities see themselves reflected in the media workforce? Do they see their community playing a dignified role in journalism’s stories of public life? Do they feel journalists respect and care about people like them? Grappling with these questions will lead to alternatives to the high modern model of a press that stakes its legitimacy only on claims to be an enlightened trustee looking out for everyone’s best interests.
There’s no easy way out of media gerrymandering. It’s not premised primarily on the biases of individual journalists or even on the prerogative of particular organizations. It’s baked into the pull of major revenue sources, whether those be digital advertising, subscriptions, and or even the impact metrics often used to evaluate foundation-funded news projects. Confronting it will require deep thought and debate about media policy that can make news institutions less dependent on market forces. This will also require creative experimentation, searching for ways to engage and earn the trust of diverse coalitions.
Let’s hope these efforts start now — with gusto!
Anthony Nadler is an associate professor of media and communication studies at Ursinus College.
Kaitlyn Wells We’ll prioritize media literacy for children
Jessica Clark Open discourse retrenches
Jacob L. Nelson Despite it all, people will still want to be journalists
Cindy Royal Yes, journalists should learn to code, but…
Mariana Moura Santos A woman who speaks is a woman who changes the world
Surya Mattu Data journalists learn from photojournalists
David Cohn AI made this prediction
Al Lucca Digital news design gets interesting again
Daniel Trielli Trust in news will continue to fall. Just look at Brazil.
Joni Deutsch Podcast collaboration — not competition — breeds excellence
Gordon Crovitz The year advertisers stop funding misinformation
John Davidow A year of intergenerational learning
Moreno Cruz Osório Brazilian journalism turns wounds into action
Larry Ryckman We’ll work together with our competitors
Sarabeth Berman Nonprofit local news shows that it can scale
Amy Schmitz Weiss Journalism education faces a crossroads
Khushbu Shah Global reporting will suffer
Molly de Aguiar and Mandy Van Deven Narrative change trend brings new money to journalism
Janelle Salanga Journalists work from a place of harm reduction
Anna Nirmala News organizations get new structures
Nicholas Diakopoulos Journalists productively harness generative AI tools
Wilson Liévano Diaspora journalism takes the next step
Joe Amditis AI throws a lifeline to local publishers
Masuma Ahuja Journalism starts working for and with its communities
Tre'vell Anderson Continued culpability in anti-trans campaigns
Jessica Maddox Journalists keep getting manipulated by internet culture
Jarrad Henderson Video editing will help people understand the media they consume
Sam Gregory Synthetic media forces us to understand how media gets made
Priyanjana Bengani Partisan local news networks will collaborate
Cory Bergman The AI content flood
Jesse Holcomb Buffeted, whipped, bullied, pulled
Nicholas Thompson The year AI actually changes the media business
Gina Chua The traditional story structure gets deconstructed
Jody Brannon We’ll embrace policy remedies
Doris Truong Workers demand to be paid what the job is worth
Lisa Heyamoto The independent news industry gets a roadmap to sustainability
Brian Stelter Finding new ways to reach news avoiders
Dannagal G. Young Stop rewarding elite performances of identity threat
Tamar Charney Flux is the new stability
Ryan Kellett Airline-like loyalty programs try to tie down news readers
Elite Truong In platform collapse, an opportunity for community
Basile Simon Towards supporting criminal accountability
Sumi Aggarwal Smart newsrooms will prioritize board development
Sam Guzik AI will start fact-checking. We may not like the results.
Cari Nazeer and Emily Goligoski News organizations step up their support for caregivers
Bill Grueskin Local news will come to rely on AI
Dana Lacey Tech will screw publishers over
Joshua P. Darr Local to live, wire to wither
Stefanie Murray The year U.S. media stops screwing around and becomes pro-democracy
Elizabeth Bramson-Boudreau More of the same
Anita Varma Journalism prioritizes the basic need for survival
Jakob Moll Journalism startups will think beyond English
Sarah Stonbely Growth in public funding for news and information at the state and local levels
Jim VandeHei There is no “peak newsletter”
Johannes Klingebiel The innovation team, R.I.P.
Kavya Sukumar Belling the cat: The rise of independent fact-checking at scale
Anika Anand Independent news businesses lead the way on healthy work cultures
Kathy Lu We need emotionally agile newsroom leaders
Ayala Panievsky It’s time for PR for journalism
Laura E. Davis The year we embrace the robots — and ourselves
Susan Chira Equipping local journalism
Sue Robinson Engagement journalism will have to confront a tougher reality
Burt Herman The year AI truly arrives — and with it the reckoning
Joanne McNeil Facebook and the media kiss and make up
Shanté Cosme The answer to “quiet quitting” is radical empathy
Andrew Donohue We’ll find out whether journalism can, indeed, save democracy
Dominic-Madori Davis Everyone finally realizes the need for diverse voices in tech reporting
Rodney Gibbs Recalibrating how we work apart
Amethyst J. Davis The slight of the great contraction
Jennifer Brandel AI couldn’t care less. Journalists will care more.
Sue Cross Thinking and acting collectively to save the news
Victor Pickard The year journalism and capitalism finally divorce
Martina Efeyini Talk to Gen Z. They’re the experts of Gen Z.
Jim Friedlich Local journalism steps up to the challenge of civic coverage
Leezel Tanglao Community partnerships drive better reporting
Ryan Nave Citizen journalism, but make it equitable
Laxmi Parthasarathy Unlocking the silent demand for international journalism
Alan Henry A reckoning with why trust in news is so low
Michael W. Wagner The backlash against pro-democracy reporting is coming
Pia Frey Publishers start polling their users at scale
Jenna Weiss-Berman The economic downturn benefits the podcasting industry. (No, really!)
Bill Adair The year of the fact-check (no, really!)
Richard Tofel The press might get better at vetting presidential candidates
Sarah Alvarez Dream bigger or lose out
Don Day The news about the news is bad. I’m optimistic.
Ståle Grut Your newsroom experiences a Midjourney-gate, too
Nikki Usher This is the year of the RSS reader. (Really!)
Felicitas Carrique and Becca Aaronson News product goes from trend to standard
Eric Holthaus As social media fragments, marginalized voices gain more power
Parker Molloy We’ll reach new heights of moral panic
AX Mina Journalism in a time of permacrisis
Juleyka Lantigua Newsrooms recognize women of color as the canaries in the coal mine
Upasna Gautam Technology that performs at the speed of news
Taylor Lorenz The “creator economy” will be astroturfed
Peter Bale Rising costs force more digital innovation
Julia Beizer News fatigue shows us a clear path forward
A.J. Bauer Covering the right wrong
J. Siguru Wahutu American journalism reckons with its colonialist tendencies
Jaden Amos TikTok personality journalists continue to rise
Danielle K. Brown and Kathleen Searles DEI efforts must consider mental health and online abuse
Eric Nuzum A focus on people instead of power
David Skok Renewed interest in human-powered reporting
Gabe Schneider Well-funded journalism leaders stop making disparate pay
Matt Rasnic More newsroom workers turn to organized labor
Jonas Kaiser Rejecting the “free speech” frame
Snigdha Sur Newsrooms get nimble in a recession
Emma Carew Grovum The year to resist forgetting about diversity
Jennifer Choi and Jonathan Jackson Funders finally bet on next-generation news entrepreneurs
Mael Vallejo More threats to press freedom across the Americas
Eric Ulken Generative AI brings wrongness at scale
Eric Thurm Journalists think of themselves as workers
Ben Werdmuller The internet is up for grabs again
Esther Kezia Thorpe Subscription pressures force product innovation
Kerri Hoffman Podcasting goes local
Christoph Mergerson The rot at the core of the news business
Tim Carmody Newsletter writers need a new ethics
Julia Angwin Democracies will get serious about saving journalism
Walter Frick Journalists wake up to the power of prediction markets
Rachel Glickhouse Humanizing newsrooms will be a badge of honor
Brian Moritz Rebuilding the news bundle
Mario García More newsrooms go mobile-first
Ryan Gantz “I’m sorry, but I’m a large language model”
Zizi Papacharissi Platforms are over
Ariel Zirulnick Journalism doubles down on user needs
Alexandra Borchardt The year of the climate journalism strategy
Alexandra Svokos Working harder to reach audiences where they are
Sue Schardt Toward a new poetics of journalism
Emily Nonko Incarcerated reporters get more bylines
Michael Schudson Journalism gets more and more difficult
Mar Cabra The inevitable mental health revolution
Delano Massey The industry shakes its imposter syndrome
Mauricio Cabrera It’s no longer about audiences, it’s about communities
Alex Sujong Laughlin Credit where it’s due
Sarah Marshall A web channel strategy won’t be enough
S. Mitra Kalita “Everything sucks. Good luck to you.”
Valérie Bélair-Gagnon Well-being will become a core tenet of journalism
Christina Shih Shared values move from nice-to-haves to essentials
Josh Schwartz The AI spammers are coming
Errin Haines Journalists on the campaign trail mend trust with the public
Alex Perry New paths to transparency without Twitter
Kirstin McCudden We’ll codify protection of journalism and newsgathering
Megan Lucero and Shirish Kulkarni The future of journalism is not you
Kaitlin C. Miller Harassment in journalism won’t get better, but we’ll talk about it more openly
Francesco Zaffarano There is no end of “social media”
Hillary Frey Death to the labor-intensive memo for prospective hires
Peter Sterne AI enters the newsroom
Andrew Losowsky Journalism realizes the replacement for Twitter is not a new Twitter
Anthony Nadler Confronting media gerrymandering
Simon Galperin Philanthropy stops investing in corporate media
Barbara Raab More journalism funders will take more risks
Raney Aronson-Rath Journalists will band together to fight intimidation
Nicholas Jackson There will be launches — and we’ll keep doing the work
Paul Cheung More news organizations will realize they are in the business of impact, not eyeballs
Karina Montoya More reporters on the antitrust beat
Mary Walter-Brown and Tristan Loper Mission-driven metrics become our North Star
Cassandra Etienne Local news fellowships will help fight newsroom inequities