{"id":9300,"date":"2025-10-24T09:16:06","date_gmt":"2025-10-24T13:16:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cntiwpedev.wpenginepowered.com\/cnti-news\/\/"},"modified":"2025-12-18T20:48:49","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T01:48:49","slug":"cnti-newsgeist-2025-trust-truth-and-innovation-in-a-shifting-industry","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cnti.org\/event-outtakes\/cnti-newsgeist-2025-trust-truth-and-innovation-in-a-shifting-industry\/","title":{"rendered":"CNTI Newsgeist 2025: Trust, Truth and Innovation in a Shifting Industry"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Over 40 hours that included 54 sessions, a half dozen ad hoc discussions and countless serendipitous conversations, Newsgeist 2025 participants pushed their thinking on some of the biggest challenges facing journalism today. From October 10 to 12, 180 participants gathered in Phoenix, Arizona, for this year\u2019s Newsgeist, the latest in a long line of Newgeists, and the first under CNTI\u2019s stewardship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Newsgeist is an unconference: the agenda is not pre-planned. On the first night, the participants shared session ideas \u2014 ranging from journalistic neutrality in wartime to what journalism can learn from K-Pop to investigative journalism with TikTok DNA \u2014 which were then organized into an always adaptable mix of choices. Newsgeist operated under the Chatham House Rule<\/mark><\/a>. There were no \u201cspeakers,\u201d only session moderators to help manage the flow of conversations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The takeaways below don\u2019t represent the full range of everything discussed at Newsgeist, nor do they suggest a consensus among participants; instead, we\u2019ve identified broad themes that arose across the weekend.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Innovation in Journalism<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Over the weekend, a recurring theme was the need to push the industry\u2019s thinking around new approaches and products for public relevance and business success. Many participants also shared in the acknowledgement that journalism has not historically taken well to adaptation and technological ideation. It will take real effort for the industry to become more innovative \u2014 and it may require traditional newsrooms to adopt some characteristics that are more natural to newer, creator-type journalists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Several participants remarked that the news industry can learn from the technology industry when it comes to rapid experimentation, shared learning, mentorship and data testing \u2014 skills that \u201ctraditional\u201d journalism is not known for but that can help foster new voices and approaches that better serve today\u2019s consumers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The news industry can also better adopt and internalize new technology to enhance and empower the work of journalists in ways not before possible. This may be even more pertinent in the age of AI: \u201cIn the age of advertisements, the metric of value exchange was the impression. In the era of traffic, the metric of value exchange was the click. In the era of generative AI, the metric of value exchange is the fact,\u201d one participant said. Participants did not agree on the extent to which the news industry should use AI, noting that the industry needs to better understand both the value and limitations of AI and other emerging technologies in order to be more strategic, and less reactive, to innovation. There was agreement, however, that journalism must act and figure out how to be part of the change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Other innovative ideas focused on things that bring communities together, such as ways to crowd-source local needs, needs-based audience surveys and more. And some wondered whether we need to rethink the structure of journalism itself, asking \u201cHow do we support journalists who operate outside any kind of institution?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Journalistic Independence and Safety<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Journalists are facing increased threats around the world \u2014 and newly so in the United States \u2014 including deportation, violence, government-imposed restrictions and harassment from people in power, bringing journalistic freedom and safety top of mind for many participants. Several participants emphasized that these threats are not a future issue; they are happening now, and journalists need to be prepared to respond.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The group shared many ideas for ways to respond, such as maintaining decentralized networks to protect journalists, sources and content; creating more solidarity and public awareness around journalism\u2019s work; building relationships throughout a community in order to reach all members when reporting on threats to health and safety, such as pandemics; emphasizing journalism\u2019s role as giving a voice to the voiceless; and consistently covering attacks on free expression and press freedom. Several people also made the point that journalists in the United States have much to learn<\/mark><\/a> from journalists in other countries who have or are currently experiencing threats against press freedom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We were also reminded that media independence goes beyond independence from government interference and control. Participants shared instances where ownership structures and funding reliance hampered journalistic independence \u2014 highlighting the need for journalism producers to build strategies for self-sustainability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Trust, Truth and Activating the Audience<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Newsgeist featured powerful discussions around truth and facts, what they each mean and how they fit together with trust. Information is always filtered through personal experience; what feels true to one person may not feel true for someone else. As one participant said, \u201cWe need to ask ourselves who we\u2019re willing to hear the truth from, and who our audience is willing to hear it from, and why.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Questions about trust and truth came up across our sessions: <\/p>\n\n\n\n