Traditional media: diminished or dominant?
‘Death of the newsroom’, ‘the decline of traditional media’, ‘news in freefall’. For years this narrative has dominated public discourse of the media industry…digital disruption, journos losing their jobs, those who remained under increasing pressure to churn stories, a fragmented industry where the audience dynamic constantly shifts on where and how they consume media.
That view is reinforced by the University of Canberra’s Digital News Report: Australia 2025, which notes that “social media platforms have overtaken online news as a main source of news.”
Facebook remains the top social media source for news (38%), while Instagram (40%) and TikTok (36%) are the top two platforms for news among 18-24 year olds. The 18-34 year olds on TikTok prefer news shared by influencers, creators and ordinary people.
Based on this, it seems the influential power of traditional media outlets is diminishing.
But let’s look at the data a little closer.
When asked what sources of news they pay most attention to on social media, “more than half reported they pay attention to news from traditional news media sources and journalists on X (53%) or Facebook (52%) with slightly lower proportions on other platforms (43%) on YouTube, 46% on Instagram, 47% on Snapchat and 45% on TikTok.”
In other words, most of the news we see on social media originates from traditional media news outlets.
What about the news shared by influencers, creators and ordinary people?
While recently developing an industry and company sentiment report for a client, I found that a large portion of the negative sentiment came from critics on social media – nothing surprising there. What was more interesting was the majority of these posts referenced or shared traditional mainstream news sites as their source material rather than native social, mirroring and amplifying news content. In addition, data shows that one in four Australians under 35 years old reported sharing news via social media.
So, via your favourite influencer, the news we see on social media originates from traditional media news outlets, ‘validated’ by an individual you trust.
Even those influencers that don’t share news sources, where are they being informed? They’re not on the frontline gathering facts – they’re consuming their chosen mainstream media like the rest of us and then paraphrasing for their followers. If they do have a different point of view, and many do, they simply don’t have the comparable audience to move the needle on public opinion.
We are and always have been divided in our opinions across generations and politics. While news from influencers is more popular among young people on social media, and older users prefer news from journalists and news organisations, the facts are we are informed by the same media outlets and their journalists, regardless of where you’re consuming it.
This leads me to the power of negative media coverage and the front page… it’s not a trending hashtag that organisations are worried about, it’s a journalist enquiry from a mainstream newspaper. Everyday politicians, corporates, leaders are questioned, called out, exposed. Stock prices are affected, CEOs are losing their jobs, scandals are brought to the surface – and then spread across every channel available.
The recent coverage and fallout of property giant JLL is a good case study. Putting aside the allegations and alleged misdoings, the media was relentless. For months, daily articles syndicated nationally in print, online and through socials. The reporting shaped the optics, causing more stones to be turned and this heavily influenced what decisions were made, ie. global CEO intervention and multiple high-profile sackings.
Traditional media outlets are printing less newspapers, but their reach and influence is greater than ever, and Australia’s C-suite knows it.
Did I mention television remains the most popular main source of news for Australians (37%)?