Confronting media gerrymandering

“If news organizations want to reach popular and heterogeneous audiences, they have to think in terms of building diverse coalitions, not a mass audience.”

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.

Gabe Schneider   Well-funded journalism leaders stop making disparate pay

Khushbu Shah   Global reporting will suffer

Jessica Clark   Open discourse retrenches

Francesco Zaffarano   There is no end of “social media”

Mar Cabra   The inevitable mental health revolution

Mariana Moura Santos   A woman who speaks is a woman who changes the world

Nicholas Jackson   There will be launches — and we’ll keep doing the work

Tre'vell Anderson   Continued culpability in anti-trans campaigns

Amy Schmitz Weiss   Journalism education faces a crossroads

Ryan Kellett   Airline-like loyalty programs try to tie down news readers

Sam Guzik   AI will start fact-checking. We may not like the results.

Dannagal G. Young   Stop rewarding elite performances of identity threat

Elizabeth Bramson-Boudreau   More of the same

Richard Tofel   The press might get better at vetting presidential candidates

Surya Mattu   Data journalists learn from photojournalists

Esther Kezia Thorpe   Subscription pressures force product innovation

Jim VandeHei   There is no “peak newsletter”

Leezel Tanglao   Community partnerships drive better reporting

Jaden Amos   TikTok personality journalists continue to rise

Jesse Holcomb   Buffeted, whipped, bullied, pulled

Hillary Frey   Death to the labor-intensive memo for prospective hires

Cari Nazeer and Emily Goligoski   News organizations step up their support for caregivers

Wilson Liévano   Diaspora journalism takes the next step

Anika Anand   Independent news businesses lead the way on healthy work cultures

Ariel Zirulnick   Journalism doubles down on user needs

Ståle Grut   Your newsroom experiences a Midjourney-gate, too

Taylor Lorenz   The “creator economy” will be astroturfed

Sue Robinson   Engagement journalism will have to confront a tougher reality

Ryan Gantz   “I’m sorry, but I’m a large language model”

Kaitlin C. Miller   Harassment in journalism won’t get better, but we’ll talk about it more openly

Cassandra Etienne   Local news fellowships will help fight newsroom inequities

Johannes Klingebiel   The innovation team, R.I.P.

Gina Chua   The traditional story structure gets deconstructed

Sumi Aggarwal   Smart newsrooms will prioritize board development

Stefanie Murray   The year U.S. media stops screwing around and becomes pro-democracy

Larry Ryckman   We’ll work together with our competitors

Jim Friedlich   Local journalism steps up to the challenge of civic coverage

Josh Schwartz   The AI spammers are coming

Mauricio Cabrera   It’s no longer about audiences, it’s about communities

Laxmi Parthasarathy   Unlocking the silent demand for international journalism

Matt Rasnic   More newsroom workers turn to organized labor

Ben Werdmuller   The internet is up for grabs again

Mary Walter-Brown and Tristan Loper   Mission-driven metrics become our North Star

Tim Carmody   Newsletter writers need a new ethics

Bill Grueskin   Local news will come to rely on AI

Michael Schudson   Journalism gets more and more difficult

A.J. Bauer   Covering the right wrong

Simon Galperin   Philanthropy stops investing in corporate media

Eric Thurm   Journalists think of themselves as workers

Daniel Trielli   Trust in news will continue to fall. Just look at Brazil.

Karina Montoya   More reporters on the antitrust beat

Rodney Gibbs   Recalibrating how we work apart

Al Lucca   Digital news design gets interesting again

Sam Gregory   Synthetic media forces us to understand how media gets made

AX Mina   Journalism in a time of permacrisis

Peter Sterne   AI enters the newsroom

Juleyka Lantigua   Newsrooms recognize women of color as the canaries in the coal mine

Alex Sujong Laughlin   Credit where it’s due

Zizi Papacharissi   Platforms are over

Priyanjana Bengani   Partisan local news networks will collaborate

Kaitlyn Wells   We’ll prioritize media literacy for children

Ryan Nave   Citizen journalism, but make it equitable

Mario García   More newsrooms go mobile-first

Sarah Marshall   A web channel strategy won’t be enough

Sarah Stonbely   Growth in public funding for news and information at the state and local levels

Tamar Charney   Flux is the new stability

Andrew Losowsky   Journalism realizes the replacement for Twitter is not a new Twitter

Jenna Weiss-Berman   The economic downturn benefits the podcasting industry. (No, really!)

Victor Pickard   The year journalism and capitalism finally divorce

Sue Schardt   Toward a new poetics of journalism

Errin Haines   Journalists on the campaign trail mend trust with the public

Mael Vallejo   More threats to press freedom across the Americas

Parker Molloy   We’ll reach new heights of moral panic

Lisa Heyamoto   The independent news industry gets a roadmap to sustainability

Anthony Nadler   Confronting media gerrymandering

Bill Adair   The year of the fact-check (no, really!)

Andrew Donohue   We’ll find out whether journalism can, indeed, save democracy

Martina Efeyini   Talk to Gen Z. They’re the experts of Gen Z.

Raney Aronson-Rath   Journalists will band together to fight intimidation

Dana Lacey   Tech will screw publishers over

Susan Chira   Equipping local journalism

Dominic-Madori Davis   Everyone finally realizes the need for diverse voices in tech reporting

Jennifer Brandel   AI couldn’t care less. Journalists will care more. 

Christoph Mergerson   The rot at the core of the news business

Eric Holthaus   As social media fragments, marginalized voices gain more power

Sue Cross   Thinking and acting collectively to save the news

Joe Amditis   AI throws a lifeline to local publishers

Sarabeth Berman   Nonprofit local news shows that it can scale

David Cohn   AI made this prediction

Joanne McNeil   Facebook and the media kiss and make up

Valérie Bélair-Gagnon   Well-being will become a core tenet of journalism

Alex Perry   New paths to transparency without Twitter

Jakob Moll   Journalism startups will think beyond English

Emily Nonko   Incarcerated reporters get more bylines

Ayala Panievsky   It’s time for PR for journalism

John Davidow   A year of intergenerational learning

Jody Brannon   We’ll embrace policy remedies

Nicholas Diakopoulos   Journalists productively harness generative AI tools

Janet Haven   ChatGPT and the future of trust 

Amethyst J. Davis   The slight of the great contraction

Jessica Maddox   Journalists keep getting manipulated by internet culture

Anna Nirmala   News organizations get new structures

Julia Beizer   News fatigue shows us a clear path forward

Jarrad Henderson   Video editing will help people understand the media they consume

Alexandra Svokos   Working harder to reach audiences where they are

Kathy Lu   We need emotionally agile newsroom leaders

Cory Bergman   The AI content flood

Gordon Crovitz   The year advertisers stop funding misinformation

Elite Truong   In platform collapse, an opportunity for community

Felicitas Carrique and Becca Aaronson   News product goes from trend to standard

Don Day   The news about the news is bad. I’m optimistic.

S. Mitra Kalita   “Everything sucks. Good luck to you.”

Laura E. Davis   The year we embrace the robots — and ourselves

Jennifer Choi and Jonathan Jackson   Funders finally bet on next-generation news entrepreneurs

Emma Carew Grovum   The year to resist forgetting about diversity

Kirstin McCudden   We’ll codify protection of journalism and newsgathering

Moreno Cruz Osório   Brazilian journalism turns wounds into action

Kerri Hoffman   Podcasting goes local

Shanté Cosme   The answer to “quiet quitting” is radical empathy

Megan Lucero and Shirish Kulkarni   The future of journalism is not you

Snigdha Sur   Newsrooms get nimble in a recession

Danielle K. Brown and Kathleen Searles   DEI efforts must consider mental health and online abuse

Eric Nuzum   A focus on people instead of power

Brian Stelter   Finding new ways to reach news avoiders

Joni Deutsch   Podcast collaboration — not competition — breeds excellence

Peter Bale   Rising costs force more digital innovation

Julia Angwin   Democracies will get serious about saving journalism

Alan Henry   A reckoning with why trust in news is so low

Janelle Salanga   Journalists work from a place of harm reduction

Jacob L. Nelson   Despite it all, people will still want to be journalists

Upasna Gautam   Technology that performs at the speed of news

Doris Truong   Workers demand to be paid what the job is worth

Rachel Glickhouse   Humanizing newsrooms will be a badge of honor

Christina Shih   Shared values move from nice-to-haves to essentials

Molly de Aguiar and Mandy Van Deven   Narrative change trend brings new money to journalism

Masuma Ahuja   Journalism starts working for and with its communities

Walter Frick   Journalists wake up to the power of prediction markets

David Skok   Renewed interest in human-powered reporting

Cindy Royal   Yes, journalists should learn to code, but…

Alexandra Borchardt   The year of the climate journalism strategy

Burt Herman   The year AI truly arrives — and with it the reckoning

Brian Moritz   Rebuilding the news bundle

Jonas Kaiser   Rejecting the “free speech” frame

Anita Varma   Journalism prioritizes the basic need for survival

Delano Massey   The industry shakes its imposter syndrome

J. Siguru Wahutu   American journalism reckons with its colonialist tendencies

Sarah Alvarez   Dream bigger or lose out

Michael W. Wagner   The backlash against pro-democracy reporting is coming

Barbara Raab   More journalism funders will take more risks

Kavya Sukumar   Belling the cat: The rise of independent fact-checking at scale

Paul Cheung   More news organizations will realize they are in the business of impact, not eyeballs

Eric Ulken   Generative AI brings wrongness at scale

Joshua P. Darr   Local to live, wire to wither

Nicholas Thompson   The year AI actually changes the media business

Nikki Usher   This is the year of the RSS reader. (Really!)

Basile Simon   Towards supporting criminal accountability

Pia Frey   Publishers start polling their users at scale