Lisa Seidenberg

October 7, 2025 by Lisa Seidenberg

Insights from Rachel Axelrod, Founder and CEO of Axelrod Consulting and Co-Founder of TEDxChicago

Whether a senior executive is stepping into a board meeting, conducting a media interview, or addressing a room full of employees, investors or other key stakeholders, it’s important to remember: subject matter expertise is only one part of the equation when it comes to high-stakes communication moments. They also require clarity, presence, storytelling and a deep understanding of your audience.

To learn more, we sat down with Rachel Axelrod, a former litigator turned speech coach and event producer. Drawing on years of experience both as a TEDx producer and executive trainer, Rachel offered the Greentarget team time-tested strategies that can elevate senior executives’ key messages—and their delivery.

Four Best Practices for Executives

Our conversation with Rachel centered on how to craft memorable and actionable messages for professional audiences. This included integrating storytelling into interviews, presentations, and speeches, as well as common pitfalls to avoid and how best to convey a unique position of authority.

Here are four best practices executives should keep top-of-mind:

The Audience Comes First

For Rachel, the first rule of high-stakes communications is simple but often overlooked: the audience comes first.

In other words, before crafting a message or presentation, she urges clients to consider:

Who is the audience (e.g., age, experience level, where they’re from, etc.)?

What do they care about?

How familiar are they with the topic?

Why are they here—by choice or obligation? (If the latter, you’ll have to do a lot more work to keep their attention.)

Rachel shared a great real-world example. One of her clients is a restaurateur here in Chicago. He gave two keynotes this year: one to 1,000 members of the National Restaurant Association at McCormick Place, and another to 250 manufacturing executives from all over the world.

In both talks, the client wanted to describe his involvement in the TV show, The Bear (which explores both the high-level of stress and deep fulfillment in the restaurant industry). At the restaurant association conference, 99% of the room had seen the show. But at the smaller manufacturing event, only 20% had heard of it. So, Rachel coached her client to give more background about the show to the group who were not familiar with it. This made her client’s message inclusive and impactful.

“Knowing your audience is everything,” she added. If they don’t understand your reference, the message won’t land.

Ditch The Jargon and Tell Stories That Stick

To make sure your key messages resonate, Rachel advises her clients to ditch the jargon, speak plainly, and, most importantly, tell stories.

“I’ve watched thousands of TED Talks and coached hundreds of speakers,” Rachel said. “I can tell you that it’s not the insights or lessons that people remember most. What truly sticks with people are the stories.”

But storytelling doesn’t mean long-winded monologues or personal confessions. Rachel breaks it down into these five fundamentals (the 5 C’s of a story):

Context – What is the setting of the story?

Characters – Who’s involved?

Conflict – What’s the tension or challenge?

Climax – What’s the turning point or moment of uncertainty?

Closure – How does it end?

Stories don’t have to be long; they just need structure.

Whether about a client, a team experience, or even someone else entirely, if the story follows the 5 C’s, it will draw the audience in and make an impact.

Practice with Intention

One of the biggest misconceptions among seasoned professionals? Thinking they can wing it.

Rachel notes, “I can’t tell you how many executives say, ‘I’m a great public speaker. I’ve done this a million times.’ But confidence can backfire if it leads to under-preparation.”

Rachel acknowledges that even the most polished speakers need to rehearse. Not just for content, but for pace, tone, and timing, especially when it comes to pausing for effect or responding to unexpected audience reactions.

Make the Message Actionable

At the end of a presentation or interview, Rachel advises clients to leave their audience with a “takeaway.” This can be a new awareness of an idea or something more concrete.

“It doesn’t have to be profound. It can be small. One of my client’s call to action was to put words of encouragement on a colleague’s monitor, like ‘You did a great job speaking up in the meeting today.’ That’s specific. And memorable.”

Whether your call to action is conceptual or explicit, it should be clear, authentic, and easy to understand.

Everyone Can Communicate Well

Rachel told us that many executives believe they’re either naturally good at public speaking or they’re not. But her experience proves otherwise: “Everyone can tell stories. Everyone can improve.”

For her, communication isn’t about being flashy. It’s about being clear, prepared, and connected to your audience.

“Whether you’re addressing a live audience, a camera, or a room full of decision-makers, what matters most is preparation, perspective, and purpose.”

August 14, 2025 by Lisa Seidenberg

In this two-part series, journalism professor and former Wall Street Journal reporter Amy Merrick unpacks two influential trends reshaping the media landscape: source transparency and generative AI. From The Washington Post’s hotly debated “From the Source” pilot to the opportunities and risks of AI in journalism, the conversation examines how newsrooms are experimenting with new ways to build trust, efficiency and engagement in an era of rapid technological change.

AI in Journalism: Why Reporters and News Outlets Must Get in the Game—Or Risk Falling Behind.

This is the second article in the series. You can view the first article here.

Generative AI is reshaping how stories are discovered, told, and trusted. At Greentarget, we’ve spent a lot of time thinking about what that means for content in the age A—including how it impacts our professional services clients when it comes to earned media.

As news outlets grapple with the challenges and opportunities that AI presents, we sat down to talk about its impacts on the current journalism landscape with journalism educator Amy Merrick, who brings insights from the newsroom and the classroom to one of the most complex—and fast-moving—technological shifts facing media today. A former reporter for The Wall Street Journal, Merrick is a senior professional lecturer at DePaul University’s College of Communication.

AI’s impact on journalism aren’t just part of her syllabus—Merrick recently enrolled in a master’s program in computer science in order to understand what AI means for journalists. In the second part of our Q&A (the first focused on The Washington Post’s “From the Source” program), we explore why she decided to dive into AI headfirst and the advantages and risks she sees for journalists.

————-

Lisa Seidenberg: Let’s switch gears to discuss AI and your decision to pursue a master’s in computer science. How’s it going so far?

Amy Merrick: I started the program because I genuinely believe that generative AI will impact everything I do, including media and education. You hear people say that we need participation from a wide range of industries and skill levels. And I agree. People from diverse backgrounds need to be part of the conversation, especially when it comes to ethical implications.

Eventually, I thought, ‘Okay, I keep saying this; maybe I need actually to be one of those people participating.’ I needed to get a lot more educated to do that helpfully. It’s easy to critique something you don’t understand, but it’s way more helpful to understand it from the inside. Why does it have particular strengths and weaknesses? What aspects of the system’s architecture lead to these issues, and what kind of systems do we want in the future?

One of the most incredible things so far is that computers no longer feel like magic. Understanding how programming and computers work helps demystify the process, and it gives me more confidence to join conversations about this topic.

There’s a lot more to come, but I’m happy I’m learning.

LS: I was especially interested in your analysis about why you started the program, especially your thoughts on generative AI and how it’s going to change journalism—both the good and the bad. You mentioned some examples in your LinkedIn post. What else are you seeing in the media landscape related to AI’s impact on journalism right now?

AM: There are lots of experiments happening right now. The Associated Press, for example, has documented pilot projects that utilize AI to assist reporters. One tool scans city council meeting transcripts for keywords and alerts reporters. Anyone who covers local news knows how challenging it is to keep up with all those meetings, but the information can be essential.

There are other tools for sending push notifications about weather alerts, and data journalists are finding AI helpful for digging through massive datasets they couldn’t manage on their own. Of course, humans still need to fact-check and be transparent about the limits of these tools, but the potential for data journalism is huge.

What surprises me on the downside is how fast some outlets jumped to using generative AI for writing stories. That’s one of the worst uses for the technology right now.

LS: Interesting–can you expand upon that?

AM: The way large language models work is basically by predicting the next word in a sequence. To prevent things from becoming too repetitive, they introduce some randomness, which can lead to creative or unexpected results, sometimes cool, sometimes not.

But when you’re writing journalism, you can’t have the AI making things up or suggesting stuff that isn’t factual. There have been cases, such as the one with the Chicago Sun-Times, where AI-generated fake book recommendations sounded plausible because they matched themes that those authors write about. However, those books weren’t real, and no one checked. It could have happened anywhere, but it became a symbol of how AI can mislead publishers.

That’s tricky because you have to know a lot about the topic to catch those errors or do very thorough fact-checking. I’m surprised by how quickly some places have jumped into using generative AI for writing, considering it’s not yet ready for that purpose.

LS: I also wanted to get your take on the policy Law360 put in place requiring all stories pass through an AI bias detection tool. Did you see that?

AM: I did! It was interesting. I conducted a small experiment in one of my classes, where students used AI to assess a news story for bias and then compared the AI’s suggestions with their partner’s thoughts. Overall, the class felt AI made some valuable suggestions. I don’t think using AI for bias detection is a crazy idea. But I was surprised they mandated it so soon, given how new and untested it is. I get why staff pushed back.

LS: Can we discuss this pushback further? What were the reporter’s concerns?

AM: The AI tool tends to suggest toning down language about wrongdoing to sound more neutral. But for a law publication, if a judge or jury found evidence of wrongdoing, you need to communicate that. So, the AI’s tendency to neutralize could interfere with accurate reporting. I like the idea of pilots and experiments, but mandating it so early seems premature. Maybe management thought they had to push it for people to try it, but trust-building between staff and management usually works better than mandates with new, untested tools.

It’s like what we said earlier. AI tools can only be practical if they keep pace with the specialized knowledge reporters bring. The tools have to make the work better, or they’re not worth it.

Change is hard for everyone, including me. There’s always some pushback, which is a healthy sign. But you need a process of testing, refining, getting people on board. If everyone resists, you have to figure out why.

LS: PR software providers Muckrack and Cision recently released their 2025 reports on the state of journalism and media, both of which delve into how reporters are utilizing AI. ChatGPT is the most widely adopted tool, according to Muckrack—it’s used by 42% of respondents—and transcription and writing tools like Grammarly were the next-most popular, used by 40% and 35%, respectively. What’s your reaction to these findings? Do they align with what you’re seeing?

AM: Transcription is probably the least controversial use, and it’s the most common, too. Tools like Otter have been utilizing AI for some time now, and the results are pretty impressive. Additionally, you always have the original audio to refer back to if you need to verify something.

Even for our student magazine, Fourteen East, which I advise, whoever is fact-checking a story will compare the transcript and the audio for any quoted material. So, AI saves a lot of time; transcribing manually can be incredibly slow.

We touched on writing earlier, but I don’t use AI to generate first drafts, and I ask my students not to either. Writing is an integral part of the thinking process. It helps you figure out what you think.

And I also worry about anchoring bias. Once you’ve got a draft, even if it came from AI, there’s a tendency to commit to it mentally, which can limit creativity and critical thinking. It’s harder to deviate from that first version.

For journalists, there are often legal and ethical concerns about inputting proprietary or unpublished material into AI tools, particularly if the data is used to train the model. Coming from The Wall Street Journal, where insider trading is a concern, we had to be extra careful. So that’s always in the back of my mind.

That said, people should experiment with AI, even in small ways. Try it out in everyday, low-stakes situations — even something like figuring out what to plant in your backyard! That way, even if you don’t end up using it professionally, you understand what it does, what you like or don’t like about it, and can speak knowledgeably about it.

Because AI isn’t going anywhere, and if you’re not using it at all, it’s harder to be part of the larger conversation around it, and that’s a conversation more people should be part of.

So, yeah, low-stakes experiments, that’s where I’d love to see more focus. It’s how we start to understand the strengths and limitations of these tools, and how they can (or can’t) be useful in different contexts.

LS: That makes sense. Is there anything you’re watching closely right now or thinking about in terms of where this is all headed?

AM: I’d love to see more people from a broader range of backgrounds and industries involved in shaping the direction AI goes. Not just people in Silicon Valley or working in tech. These tools will impact numerous aspects of life and society, so the more diverse perspectives we have in the room, the better.

At Greentarget, we help clients lead with authority in a media environment where technology, misinformation, and shifting trust are resetting the terms of engagement at lightning speed. If you’re exploring how AI could shape your communications, newsroom relationships, or thought leadership strategy, we’re here to guide you.

Learn how Greentarget helps organizations navigate the future of media with clarity, credibility, and purpose. Get in touch.

July 23, 2025 by Lisa Seidenberg

How the Washington Post’s “From the Source” Could Redefine Media Transparency: A Q&A with Chicago Journalism Educator Amy Merrick

This is the first article in the series.

News that The Washington Post is launching a new system that allows people quoted in some articles to add annotations after publication ignited a firestorm of debate across the media landscape. Commenters suggested the program could enable attacks on the reporting (or the reporter), amplify misinformation, allow sources to walk back quotes, or simply provide a platform for self-interested promotion.

The goal of the “From the Source” system is to encourage readers to engage in on-site conversations rather than shifting to social media platforms. The initiative also comes as other pressures weigh on media outlets as they confront profound economic challenges to their business model—including the explosive growth of generative AI, with chatbots and GenAI search results tanking traffic to news sites from traditional search referrals.

To unpack the implications of it all, we caught up with Amy Merrick, a senior professional lecturer at DePaul University’s College of Communication and former reporter for The Wall Street Journal. Merrick is a faculty adviser to the school’s 14 East magazine and its Society of Professional Journalists chapter. She includes discussions on the impact of AI as part of her syllabus and recently enrolled in a master’s program in computer science in order to understand what AI means for journalists and help her students get ready for what’s next.

We talked with Merrick about the significance of the Post’s new offering and where she thinks AI and journalism are headed. What follows is the first part of that conversation, focused on “From the Source” and what the initiative could mean for both journalists and sources. In the comings weeks, stay tuned for the second part, which examines the fast-moving impacts that AI is having on journalism.

Lisa Seidenberg: The online response to The New York Times’ story on “From the Source” was strong, to say the least. As a former journalist, what was your reaction, and do you agree with these concerns?  

Amy Merrick: The climate section at The Washington Post has been a space for experimentation before, so it doesn’t surprise me that they’re starting this pilot program there. The first thing I’d say is that established media companies really should be doing more of these pilot projects. They should be trying new things, testing ideas. We’re still seeing outstanding journalism happening across the US and around the world, but on the business and tech side, the media has fallen behind. That’s opened the door for tech companies to capture a lot of the growth and audience.

These types of experiments should be encouraged. Honestly, I was surprised by how negative some of the early reactions were, especially since the program hasn’t even fully launched or had a chance to evolve. There’s a tendency in the media industry to shoot down new ideas before they’ve had a chance to prove themselves.

Now, I don’t know if this pilot will be the one that’s a breakthrough, but I’m glad they’re trying something. And while I get the concerns around the annotations, I also see the potential. As a reporter, part of the job is to critically assess the information you’re given, put it into context, and bring different perspectives into conversation. If sources are then coming in to annotate or add further context, that could be valuable in the best-case scenario.

LS: On the theme of adding meaningful value, do you think this system will add an opportunity for authorities to share a new point of view or enhance the story?

AM: Yes, they’re allowing sources to offer valuable extra context that didn’t fit into the story itself, which is helpful.

These days, not much is limited to just print, but back when it was, that was a bigger constraint. Even now, though, if you’re trying to keep a precise angle or focus, you can’t go in every direction at once.

So, ideally, you’d have climate experts providing background or further explanation that didn’t make the final cut. It functions like a footnote or appendix, allowing readers who want to delve deeper to do so.

If this idea catches on, it could become a new skill people develop, figuring out how to add something meaningful to articles after they’re published. It works like online comments, providing context instead of relying on hyperlinks that most readers don’t click. It’s a way to be more transparent and help readers better understand the sources.

I did notice, however, that in some early examples, the annotations were mostly company press releases, and I’m not sure how useful those are in terms of adding meaningful value.

LS: The goal of this is driving reader engagement. Do you think it will?

AM: It’s too soon to say if this will drive more engagement, but people do like having conversations about stories and sharing their input. A well-moderated comment section can be such a pleasure. I read some newsletters on Substack where readers share thoughtful opinions, and platforms like Reddit, with its upvoting and downvoting features, can work well.

I do think audiences expect to participate in conversations now, and trying new ways to do that is smart from a business perspective. More engagement typically means more time spent on the site or app, which can help with advertising, subscriptions, or donations. Journalists want their work to be read, too, so audience engagement is key. It used to be treated as an afterthought, but now places that do it well make it a core part of the process.

LS: Will other outlets be watching how this works and deciding if they want to try it too? It may make sense for specialized or trade publications, like climate-focused ones.

AM: Interestingly, they’re starting with climate, which is a pretty technical topic where readers want lots of detail. That’s a great place to experiment.

However, if they expand into political stories, that could become complicated as politicians tend to stick to their messaging, and back-and-forth discussions about wording could be a headache. But they haven’t tried it yet, so we’ll have to see how it plays out.

I think other outlets will be paying attention. For trade publications with a knowledgeable audience, this could be valuable. The Post is known for being experimental these days, so many people watch what it does closely. Of course, there has been a lot of scrutiny on them lately, with ownership issues and all, so they’re definitely in the spotlight.

As Merrick explains, experimentation in journalism—especially in how media organizations engage sources and audiences—deserves room to evolve. While “From the Source” raises valid questions, it also presents an opportunity for newsrooms and communicators to rethink transparency and audience trust.

In the second part of our Q&A, Merrick shares why she’s diving headfirst into AI and how she sees it reshaping newsrooms—from transcription tools to editorial ethics and everything in between.

At Greentarget, we help organizations navigate this changing landscape with communications strategies rooted in credibility, authority and earned engagement. Want to understand how changes in journalism affect your content and communications strategy? Let’s talk.

April 10, 2025 by Lisa Seidenberg

Staff reductions. Eroding trust. Economic headwinds. These are the headlines dominating discussions about journalism today. They paint a picture of an industry in decline — a narrative many have accepted without question.

But this doom-and-gloom perspective misses half the story. While challenges exist, journalism remains a robust and credible communications vehicle, particularly among the stakeholders professional services firms seek to influence.

The media landscape isn’t dying. But it is transforming. And creating new opportunities for professional services firms ready to stake their positions of authority. Following are the key trends driving the news industry’s evolution — and how you can leverage them to enhance your firm’s position of authority.

Journalism’s Reality is More Nuanced Than Headlines Suggest

The Poynter Institute’s 2024 report on trends in the journalism and news industry offers a refreshing counterpoint to the prevailing narrative of journalistic extinction. It reveals a landscape in which innovation drives new opportunities. From small, digital-first startups to AI-driven workflows and alternative content distribution platforms, the report suggests the future of journalism may be more dynamic and diverse than what many suggest.

Hundreds of news or niche information sites have launched in recent years. Many are independent, while others represent new offerings from existing companies. At the same time, an influx of independent content creators (fueled by self-publishing platforms like Substack) is democratizing the news by telling important stories that were once the sole domain of journalists.

Success stories attesting to the vitality of the news industry abound but rarely make headlines:

When the recently established Baltimore Banner newspaper celebrated its two-year anniversary this spring, it was flourishing — meeting its subscription goals, growing its newsroom to 80 journalists, and announcing plans to increase investment in education coverage.
Over the past three years, small nonprofit newsrooms like the Invisible Institute, Mississippi Today, and the Better Government Association have won Pulitzer Prizes for local news coverage.
Public radio and TV stations in 74 local markets successfully expanded their digital audiences beyond traditional broadcasting, with the Corporation for Public Broadcasting now extending this initiative to 225 markets.

These examples underscore a critical truth. Audiences’ appetite for trustworthy news and information remains strong. But capturing that audience requires high-quality, fact-based reporting delivered through innovative formats. The news organizations succeeding today have widened their perspective on how to serve audiences beyond traditional content approaches.

From a PR perspective, the Poynter findings reveal abundant opportunities in both traditional and emerging media channels. These insights allow strategic communicators to connect professional services firms with key stakeholders through earned media placements that transform expert commentary into tangible business development opportunities.

The Trump Effect

As traditional outlets face reduced access to White House briefings and other governmental sources, they seek authoritative voices to analyze and contextualize fast-moving executive orders, policy changes, and other developments.

This dynamic creates openings for professional services firms to position their experts (especially those with legal and regulatory expertise) as valuable resources who can fill the gap for journalists.

Simultaneously, the current administration has broadened press credential access to include influencers and podcasters, signaling a shift beyond traditional media. In this context, your firm can gain new opportunities to share your expertise and reach target audiences through emerging platforms.

In a dynamic media landscape made more tumultuous by the current administration, professional services firms stand to add meaningful perspectives to daily news conversations that shape industry understanding.

Niche Media’s Rise: Precision Targeting for Earned Media

While many major news outlets continue to struggle with business model challenges, niche publications focused on specific industries or executive audiences are thriving. This trend toward specialization is especially intriguing for professional services firms, who have the opportunity to capture precision-targeted earned media opportunities.

Industry Dive exemplifies this success, launching eight new industry publications in 2023 alone. Their focused approach earned them recognition on Fast Company‘s list of the world’s most innovative companies of 2024.

Similarly, publishers are developing new content channels that specifically target C-suite executives. Consider Semafor’s invitation-only newsletter, The CEO Signal, which is exclusively available to leaders of companies with more than $500 million in annual revenue.

This trend aligns perfectly with findings from Greentarget’s 2025 State of Digital & Content Marketing research. Our annual survey revealed that 88% of legal and C-suite decision makers value traditional media — the highest score in seven years. Executives continue to rely on editorially vetted content from trusted sources for business intelligence.

The growing list of niche outlets provides professional services firms unprecedented opportunities to reach specific stakeholders with tailored perspectives, allowing you to establish authority with the exact audiences you seek to influence.

Navigating Visibility and Referral Challenges

The way audiences discover information is fundamentally changing — and it’s posing new obstacles for media outlets.

This is primarily due to two factors. First, AI-generated answers are crowding out organic search results and heralding a new era of zero-click search.

Second, social media platforms are focusing more heavily on video and other proprietary formats in an effort to keep users on-platform, meaning they are deprioritizing the external links that drive audiences to external media outlets. As a result, according to Reuters Institute’s research, traffic referrals from social platforms have plummeted. Over the past two years, traffic from Facebook to news and media properties has declined by two-thirds (67%), while traffic from X is down by half (50%).

Media outlets are responding to these twin challenges by forming new partnerships with AI companies to protect their visibility. For instance, OpenAI has entered a licensing arrangement with News Corp — which owns The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, The Times, and The Sun — reportedly worth around $250m over five years. Reuters, the AP, Financial Times, and Le Monde have also agreed to significant deals.

In order to continue reaching their key audiences, professional services firms must adapt their own content strategies in light of these trends. The key concept is COPE — Create Once, Publish Everywhere:

Maximize owned content with in-depth thought leadership that showcases true authority
Leverage this content to secure earned media opportunities with journalists
Broadcast and share on social channels, especially LinkedIn
Use paid amplification for top-performing content

This approach ensures content reaches decision-makers regardless of how AI reshapes search and social media shapes referrals, allowing firms to build direct relationships with their audience while maintaining visibility in trusted publications.

The Path Forward

The truth about journalism in 2025 defies simple characterization. While structural challenges persist, opportunities abound for those willing to engage strategically with a transformed media landscape.

Professional services firms that understand these dynamics can position their experts as true authorities and find a ready audience with journalists, content creators, and the professionals they seek to influence.

The media remains a vital channel for professional services expertise — not in spite of current challenges, but because those challenges are reshaping journalism into something more nimble, targeted, and audience-focused than ever before.

June 6, 2024 by Lisa Seidenberg

It’s been a difficult year for journalism. Over the last 12 months, we’ve watched as some of the biggest newsrooms of the digital age have shut down or teetered on the edge of failure. Layoffs are happening at a dizzying pace at marquee publications including The Washington Post, Time, Sports Illustrated, the Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal. More than 500 journalists were laid off in January alone, adding to an already record-breaking streak in 2023.

Yet journalists do not shy away from adversity. They cover global catastrophes, dropping into war zones and braving dangerous environments to bring us the news we need to make informed decisions. So while they’re probably less used to being the story, they know how to face a tough situation with grit, creativity and resilience. And as Greentarget’s own research reveals, the next generation of journalists is positive about the future of the fourth estate.

To learn more about what that future may look like, we recently spoke to Hanaa Tameez, a staff writer for the Nieman Journalism Lab at Harvard University who covers innovation in news media.

Over the last four years, Tameez has followed and reported on new business models, audience engagement strategies, the financial stability of traditional media outlets, and anything that challenges the status quo—including artificial intelligence (AI). Perhaps surprisingly, Tameez is also “generally and genuinely optimistic about the state of the news industry.” Here are three positive takeaways from our conversation.

#1: AI doesn’t spell the death of journalism

In a year when five Pulitzer Prize finalists disclosed using AI in the process of researching, reporting, or telling their submissions, we were keen to get Tameez’s take on how AI may impact journalism in the future.

While she said that “AI can be a threat, especially if it’s in the wrong hands and used for generating mis/disinformation,” Tameez also pointed out that (as some journalists have already discovered), “it also has many capabilities that can advance journalism if used correctly.”

As many commentators and journalists have said, we can’t operate from a position of fear when it comes to AI. Tameez reminded us that, in fact, we’ve been using AI technologies like Google Translate, audio transcription services, Siri, and Alexa for many years—a fact underscored by our own research.

Generative AI platforms are the next iteration of these tools, and they can make our lives and our work easier. However, Tameez cautioned that when it comes to the use of AI, “if you can do it ethically and offer more transparency in journalism, this is always better.”

#2: Niche publications are on the rise

As the news industry continues to fragment and segment, Tameez believes we will see “an increase in publications that cover niche issues” as consumers look to subscribe to outlets that offer in-depth reporting on their interests, such as parenting magazines or sports sites.

Industry and trade publications that target business-to-business (B2B) readers may see a similar boost. Jacob Donnelly, founder of A Media Operator, a publication that focuses on building digital media companies, is “pretty confident about the financial health of the B2B media space right now,” he said on a recent American Society of Business Publication Editors webinar. According to Donnelly, “publishers are starting to realize that smaller, more engaged audiences are where their livelihoods will last.”

Not only are trade publications and niche outlets faring better under the ad revenue model—not entirely surprising, considering their target audiences—they’re also still securing reader subscriptions. The combination helps drive revenue on two fronts.

Semafor’s Max Tani also wrote about the pivot to niche as publications focus on building stronger bonds with their readers:

“You see that everywhere now. The collapse of mass brands like BuzzFeed and Vice, the rise of a generation of much more narrowly focused ones, including this one, and a scramble to rescue beloved outlets like Pitchfork by returning them to a smaller, dedicated audience.”

#3: College journalism is filling local reporting gaps

As local news outlets struggle to stay afloat, an unexpected group is helping to keep local journalism alive: students.

The Christian Science Monitor recently covered how universities are stepping in to fill the gap as local news deserts grow. For example, the college newspaper The Daily Iowan recently purchased two struggling weekly publications. While that move was a first, other universities are stepping up to fill America’s news void in different ways, with initiatives ranging from student-staffed statehouse bureaus to newspapers run by journalism schools.

Tameez told us she has always been “a big proponent of student journalism” because that’s “where journalists learn to work.” She was the editor of her college paper, an experience that taught her how to be a journalist. While her team broke stories that made local news and national stories years later, “they weren’t given the platform in the same way student journalists have a platform now. Because of the challenges in local news, college journalism is filling the gaps.”

That’s not to say that journalism and journalists aren’t struggling—they are.

Despite Tameez’s overall optimism, she said that it’s been challenging to watch “real-life journalism getting lost” in layoffs. And while new news outlets are starting up, the rate at which other media outlets are crumbling is accelerating much faster. “It will take time to build a sustainable organization that can engage people in ways they deserve,” she said.

As news organizations adapt to these new challenges and opportunities, Greentarget will carefully monitor and report on the resulting data and trends. The principles of journalism drive smarter conversations, and true authorities have a responsibility to participate skillfully in the ongoing discussion. Quite simply, we all need the services journalists provide.

From our standpoint, Greentarget will strive to continue being empathetic to reporters in an era of smaller staff and a 24-hour news cycle. We know journalists need authorities with perspectives that serve the rapidly evolving needs of their audiences. We will continue to deliver.

August 17, 2023 by Lisa Seidenberg

Journalists have long seen themselves as members of the fourth estate—watchdogs whose work informs the public, shines a light on injustice and holds power to account. But in recent years, Americans’ trust in the media has plummeted amid deepening political polarization and the rampant spread of misinformation and disinformation online.

That’s why in 2020 and 2021, Greentarget conducted research to understand the toll that so-called “fake news” is taking on seasoned journalists—and offer guidance for how PR professionals and business leaders can help stem the tide.

Since then, the challenges facing journalism have only deepened, from widespread media layoffs to technological shifts like the explosive growth of generative artificial intelligence (AI) that could automate some reporting and writing tasks—and potentially further undermine journalism jobs. Those developments prompted a different approach to our ongoing research.

For our latest iteration, we surveyed young reporters and journalism students to understand the following:

Why they’re committed to pursuing the profession
Their outlook on the future of journalism
Their perspectives on AI, social media and fake news

We’ll publish the full report in the coming weeks. In the meantime, here’s a glimpse at why up-and-coming journalists are optimistically jumping into the arena, and how they view factors that are changing the industry in real time.

1. To Provide Credible, Fact-Based Information

Nearly all the up-and-coming journalists we surveyed believe traditional media should be impartial. And a majority said a key reason they’re entering the field is to provide accurate information that the public can rely on to make informed decisions—reflecting respondents’ faith in the role of the press as an arbiter of truth and accountability.

So where does their credible information come from? Respondents said they research and/or vet stories using tried-and-true techniques from the reporter’s toolbox, including:

Doing first-hand field reporting
Reviewing top-tier publications
Reaching out to academics, experts, and/or think tanks
Looking at information from government agencies/organizations

Respondents had a complex relationship with social media, which they used to generate story ideas and/or vet information—but to a lesser degree than the above methods. That may be due to next-gen journalists’ view that social media is a key spreader of false or misleading information. However, they also see social media as valuable for distribution and measurement.

AI-enabled tools from ChatGPT to Google Translate are also gaining ground for some tasks, including data analysis, research, writing and editing. But some respondents expressed concern about how AI could impact the industry in the future, citing the potential for inaccuracy and/or misinformation, as well as fears that technology could replace some human journalists.

Whatever the tools, they reported taking several steps to verify that the information they publish is trustworthy, including:

Contacting the source directly
Securing multiple sources
Searching for corroborating sources
Using fact-checking sites (e.g., PolitiFact) to avoid spreading false information

2. To Shine a Light on Injustice and Social Issues

Gen Z (those born between the late 90s and early 2000s) may be the most progressive, technologically savvy, and socially-minded generation yet, and share many values that Millennials also prioritize. It’s no wonder, then, that this generation views a career in journalism as a way to tell the truth about what’s happening in the world around them and, in some cases, advance the social change they want to see.

Many of the reasons respondents cited for deciding to pursue journalism reflect those concerns, including:

To expose injustice
To make a difference in the world
To hold governments and institutions accountable

Next-gen journalists also said that diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) is a significant concern, both in newsrooms and in terms of coverage. Many respondents believe that diversity in the profession across racial, gender, and economic categories is foundational for good reporting, and note that lack of representation could lead to narrow coverage, “social imbalance” on topics in the news—and the loss of public trust.

3. To Combat the Spread of Fake News

Students and NextGen journalists aren’t naive about the challenges they’ll face as a result of misinformation (information that is false) and disinformation (information that is intentionally fabricated). In fact, many respondents expected the problem to worsen, with social media cited as a leading factor.

But they also don’t hold a purely doom-and-gloom view. Rather, they’re passionate about the opportunity to combat misinformation and disinformation in their sphere of influence. In fact, nearly half of our survey respondents said fighting fake news is one reason they want to be journalists.

As digital natives, Gen Z could be uniquely qualified to take up this battle cry. A marked rise in media literacy education means members of this generation may be more likely to know how to ask critical questions about the media they consume, spot misleading or false claims, and avoid manipulation.

Despite Challenges, Gen Z Looks at the Future of Journalism With Optimism

In our last Fake News Report, only 14% of journalists said they believed their own efforts had an impact on the fight against misinformation and disinformation. According to our survey, Gen Z holds a more upbeat view, responding that their outlook for the next decade is at least somewhat positive.

At Greentarget, we’re optimistic about the future as well. And in large part because of what we’re learning from the next generation of journalists, we continue to believe that traditional media will play a crucial role in inspiring and leading smarter conversations.

We’ll delve more deeply into the reasons for that optimism when we release our full report later this year.