A recent poll conducted for the Jordan Center for Journalism Innovation and Advocacy at the University of Mississippi found that “online platforms and personalities, especially those on the right, have overtaken television and traditional print outlets as regular news sources among people who voted in the previous U.S. presidential election.” It seems that political figures, including Trump himself, as well as Joe Rogan and Greg Gutfeld were some of the top voices right-wing audiences turned to for their information on current events. Even for those on the left, late-night hosts like Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert ranked higher than CNN, the New York Times, or any other any traditional journalistic institution.
There’s always been power in controlling the flow of information. In 18th-century Britain, the press was referred to as the “Fourth Estate,” with the first three being the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners. It was seen as a necessary branch that checked and balanced the accuracy and flow of information to the public. Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, the authors of the book “The Elements of Journalism,” wrote that “the primary purpose of journalism is to provide citizens with the information they need to be free and self-governing.”
The current rise of internet personalities and multi-hyphenates has blurred the lines between the opinion of the masses and fact. In so doing, the truth can become unclear or skewed. I empathize with those who seem captivated by the search for truth in current media. Who can we trust to tell us what’s actually happening? Those directly involved? Nowadays it seems the overarching belief is that going straight to the source limits the possibility of information being falsified. In an era of “fake news,” it makes sense that people would want to hear directly from those involved instead of traditional media institutions.
The distrust of modern media giants has contributed to the appeal of Donald Trump and his “Make America Great Again” movement, often characterized by supporters as someone who “tells it like it is.” It is the same reason a politician like Zohran Mamdani or podcasts like “Call Her Daddy” reach such a wide audience. There’s a commitment to authenticity coming from someone with skin in the game. Whether that individual is a celebrity or a councilmember, that is what appeals to modern audiences.
Despite this longing for authenticity, many people appear less interested in traditional, objective reporting. As evidenced by the Jordan Center data, it seems the public is much more interested in a subjective and unique truth that allows us to filter out any opposing information. After all, this more personal truth should grant us the ability to be freethinkers instead of beholden to institutional opinions. But is that a good thing? Does that produce anything more than public figures preaching to the choir, making no real change?
It’s important to note that this phenomenon isn’t new. Steven L. Herman, the executive director of the Jordan Center, explained that “even in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, sensationalist and polarizing voices in print and later on air were among the most influential in the political landscape.” He continued, citing Mark Twain and Father Charles Coughlin as major players in their days. Now, in the 21st century, it’s just that the satirist has turned into a podcaster or a blogger with a Substack. “On these platforms, opinionated personalities and comedians appear to drown out anyone who would fit in the traditional journalistic category,” Herman noted. While it appears to be human nature to seek out these louder, opinionated voices, we must be careful to not allow them to be the only ones heard.
I tend to feel like the only way to make a dent in the internet ecosystem is to build a strong personal brand. One that comes with catchphrases, merchandise, and a hint of propaganda. Everybody that has a platform online doesn’t use these things maliciously, but there will always those who do. No one is immune to propaganda, so the best safeguard is fact-based, independent journalism.
