There was a time when the morning newspaper, the evening television bulletin or the radio news programme largely determined what society would discuss that day. Editors decided which stories deserved prominence, journalists gathered and verified the facts, and audiences largely consumed what professional news organisations chose to publish.
That world has changed.
Today, an algorithm can determine what millions of people see before a journalist has even had the opportunity to explain it. A short video, a social-media post, an influencer’s commentary or an AI-generated summary can reach a massive audience within minutes. The question facing journalism is therefore no longer simply what should we publish? It is increasingly who decides what the public sees, and on what basis?
The 2026 Reuters Institute Digital News Report provides a striking indication of the scale of this transformation. For the first time, social media and video networks have overtaken television and news organisations’ websites and apps as the most widely used sources of news globally. Fifty-four per cent of audiences now use social media and video networks for news, while 56 percent do so when AI chatbots are included.
This is more than a technological shift. It is a shift in editorial power.
The traditional editor had a newsroom, professional standards and, ideally, an identifiable institution behind every decision. Algorithms operate differently. They learn from behaviour: what we click, watch, share, comment on and return to. Their objective is often engagement rather than public-interest journalism.
That distinction matters.
A complicated investigation into public spending may take weeks to produce and may receive modest engagement. A sensational claim, celebrity controversy or emotionally charged video can attract thousands of reactions within hours.
When algorithms reward engagement, the content that travels furthest is not necessarily the content society needs most.
This creates a difficult paradox for media organisations. They must go where audiences are, yet the platforms where audiences increasingly consume information are not controlled by newsrooms. The challenge becomes even greater with artificial intelligence.
The Reuters Institute reports that 10 percent of people globally now use AI chatbots for news, up from 7 percent the previous year. Among people under 35, usage reaches 16 percent. Yet trust in news obtained through AI chatbots remains relatively low: only 20 percent globally say they trust news from AI chatbots.
AI can help journalists research, translate, summarise documents, analyse data and automate repetitive tasks. Used responsibly, it can make journalism faster and potentially better. But speed should never become a substitute for verification.
The danger is that AI can produce an answer that sounds authoritative while mixing accurate information with errors or unsupported claims. Unlike a newspaper article, where readers can identify the journalist and publication, an AI-generated answer may obscure the original sources behind a seamless response.
Recent reporting has highlighted concerns that AI-generated search summaries could reduce traffic to original publishers while creating another layer between journalists and audiences. This brings us to the most important asset journalism possesses: trust.
The 2026 Digital News Report found that global trust in news has fallen to 37 percent , its lowest level recorded since the Reuters Institute began measuring it in 2015. At the same time, 62 percent of respondents expressed concern about misinformation online.
For African and Tanzanian media, this should be a wake-up call.
Our challenge is not simply to produce more content. It is to produce credible content that audiences value enough to seek out and trust.
News organisations must invest in original reporting, investigative journalism, fact-checking, strong digital storytelling and journalists who understand both technology and ethics.
They must also stop measuring success purely by clicks. A million views can be impressive, but what did those views achieve? Did they inform citizens? Did they improve public understanding? Did they strengthen trust? Did they hold someone accountable? Did they contribute something original?
These are harder questions, but they are the questions journalism must ask.
The future will not necessarily belong to the biggest newsroom. It may belong to the organisation that best combines human judgement with technology.
Algorithms can identify patterns. AI can process information. Platforms can distribute content at extraordinary speed. But journalism still needs human beings to ask difficult questions, challenge powerful interests, verify claims and understand the consequences of what they publish.
The editor may no longer be the only gatekeeper.
But that does not mean journalism should surrender its gatekeeping responsibility. The future of media is not about defeating the algorithm. It is about ensuring that the algorithm does not replace judgement.
Because when everyone can publish, the real value of journalism is no longer simply being first. It is being right, relevant and trusted.
