The latest Reuters Institute report on global news consumption habits offers a sobering snapshot of the state of journalism in Canada. Two trends in particular stand out: First, the declining trust in traditional media, and second, the rise of alternative platforms like YouTube and Facebook as primary news sources.
These findings should force Canadian policymakers to confront an uncomfortable question: Are public subsidies for legacy news organizations doing more harm than good by propping up a model that no longer serves the public interest?
The Reuters data reveals that only 39 percent of Canadians trust the media, which represents a 16-point decline from just a decade ago. This collapse in confidence broadly coincides with the debate about and eventual adoption of direct and indirect government subsidies for news media outlets. While correlation doesn’t imply causation, the timing is hard to ignore.
Source: Reuters Institute. This data represents the overall trust in the news.
Graphic Credit: Janice Nelson.
Public subsidies have been justified as a way to preserve “essential” journalism and bolster civic engagement. Yet the numbers suggest the opposite may be happening. The industry’s growing financial dependence on the government is hastening a decline in public trust and a disengagement from the legacy media altogether.
The corrosiveness of journalism subsidies is both seen and unseen. One clear consequence is how they’ve caused news organizations to morph into lobbyists for their own interests. The use of their own platforms to advocate for policies—like mandated payments from tech firms—that serve their bottom lines is a huge problem precisely because it’s so blindingly obvious. The National Post’s recent op-ed about the case for taking Google and Facebook is a case in point. Readers recognize when outlets use their platforms to advance their own self-interests rather than the public interest.
Another is the growing gap between the perceived influence of these outlets and the Canadian public’s revealed preferences in terms of their actual news consumption. We often hear that the legacy outlets are irreplaceable pillars of democracy but the Reuters report raises real doubts. If they’re so irreplaceable, why is only a small (and declining) share of Canadians relying on them for news and information? At some point, public policy should presumably concern itself with what Canadians actually want.
The CBC’s case is particularly telling. Despite its billion-dollar subsidy, it isn’t the top broadcast choice for Canadians. Yet it’s consuming scarce advertising dollars that would otherwise go to its private competitors like CTV and Global who depend on market-based revenues to deliver news. These unseen costs of the CBC’s public funding are too often neglected in our policy debates.
Source: Reuters Institute. The numbers indicate the percentage of weekly usage for each brand.
Graphic Credit: Janice Nelson.
The most striking data points to a major shift in how Canadians consume news. Twenty-eight percent now turn to YouTube for news, 25 percent to Facebook, and significant shares to Instagram and other social platforms. The numbers are even more marked if one adjusts for age. The legacy media is increasingly the purview of older Canadians and new media is a go-to source for the rest of us.
Source: Reuters Institute. The social media, messaging, and video networks listed here indicate where Canadians go to for news.
Graphic Credit: Janice Nelson.
Critics dismiss these sources as unreliable, but the truth is more nuanced. Local news, community updates, and even investigative reporting are flourishing on these platforms, often through independent creators who may not have traditional journalism credentials but have built trust with their audiences.
Which brings us to a key takeaway from the Reuters report: We don’t know what the future of the news will be, but we can say quite reliably that it won’t be monolithic. A dynamic, decentralized ecosystem—where information flows through multiple channels—may better serve the public than a top-down model reliant on state support. Yet policymakers remain fixated on preserving the old order, pouring hundreds of millions into outlets that fewer and fewer Canadians trust or consume. The policy paradox is that the public subsidies are actually making things worse.
The report should therefore be a challenge to policymakers. If the goal is to inform citizens and bolster our democracy with trusted news and information, journalism subsidies must be reevaluated. Canadians are voting with their attention, and they’re choosing alternatives to subsidized legacy media. Clinging to an analogue model in a digital world is wasteful, undermines trust, and stifles the real innovation that journalism needs and Canadians want.
The future of news won’t look like the past. It will be decentralized, competitive, and driven by creators who earn trust rather than demand it. Policymakers should stop standing in the way.
Generative AI assisted in the production of this article.
