More Australians get their news via social media than traditional sources for first time, report finds
The University of Canberra's News and Media Research Centre found television (37%) remains the most popular source of news (up 1% from 2024) but more consumers now go to Facebook, X, YouTube and other platforms than to a legacy news outlet.
The number of people reporting they use online news as their main source of news has dropped dramatically – from 28% in 2024 to 23% in 2025 – while social media as a main source of news has risen one percentage point from 25% to 26%.
More than one in 20 respondents (6%) said they had asked artificial intelligence chatbots for news in the week prior, the report said.
The Australian study is part of an international survey by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, which canvassed almost 100,000 news consumers worldwide, including a statistical sample of 2,006 people in Australia.
Australia is part of an international trend away from traditional news organisations towards podcasters, YouTubers and TikTokers.
The recent Australian election saw politicians turning to independent commentators and journalists on Instagram, YouTube and TikTok to spread their message.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
The University of Canberra survey shows social media is a popular place for poeple aged 18 to 24 to watch news videos, with more than one-third watching them on TikTok (37%) and Instagram (34%).
A video posted on Anthony Albanese's TikTok account at the weekend, where the prime minister speaks about paid practical for 'nurses, teachers, midwives and social workers', had garnered 1.7m views as of Tuesday afternoon.
However, news consumers in Australia who are highly interested in news and politics are more likely to rely on online news as their main source, the report found.
Channel Seven is the most watched television news brand (34%), followed by ABC (31%). While there was a drop in viewership of the top three TV news brands, Sky News Australia's reach increased by four percentage points (17%) over the past 12 months, the survey found, as did The Australian newspaper (13%).
Only 7% of respondents say they rely mainly on radio and 5% on print. Podcasts and AI chatbots are relatively minor: 2% report podcasts as their main news source and 1% are using AI chatbots as their main news source.
Prof Sora Park, the lead author at UC's News and Media Research Centre, said trust in news has risen slightly this year and is highest among people who have undertaken news literacy education.
'In fact, these consumers have higher interest in news and are more likely to pay for it,' she said.
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
'This suggests that increasing media literacy across the population could not only help boost trust in news but also be part of the economic solution in the years to come.'
ABC News (60%) is the most trusted news outlet, followed by SBS News (59%), local newspapers (58%), BBC News (57%) and Channel Seven News (55%).
Australia's news media are not as polarised as those in the UK and US. 'Audience levels of trust remain steady,' the report found. 'The main public broadcasters ABC and SBS continue to attract the most trust, though popular commercial television and national newspapers are only slightly behind.'
Consumers in Australia are more likely to pay for news, with 22% being above the average of 18% in a group of 20 countries where publishers push subscriptions.
The figure is highest in Norway (42%), followed by Sweden (31%). The US is behind Australia with 20%.
Globally, overall trust in the news (43%) has remained stable for the third year in a row, but was four points lower overall than it was at the height of the pandemic.
Researchers are also tracking news avoidance, with 69% of people saying they avoid news because it has a negative impact on their mood, or is untrustworthy or biased.
Interest in news has been gradually falling since 2016, particularly among women.
This 14th edition of Digital News Report is based on data from six continents and 48 markets.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Pro-Palestine protest LIVE updates: Sydney Harbour Bridge is shut down ahead of 50,000-strong demonstration - as cops issue final warning
'Do not come to the city' NSW Acting Assistant Police Commissioner Adam Johnson urged people to avoid Sydney's CBD where possible. He warned 'the risk is the numbers [of protesters] are unknown' 'If you're not going to engage in the assembly I would suggest you do not come to the city,' Johnson said. 'There's going to be major disruptions. 'But if you choose to come in and participate in the assembly, please do so reasonably, lawfully, listen to police instructions, listen to the marshals who are leading the procession as well.'
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
Bad men problem: Gareth Ward and Mark Latham leave NSW parliament in unchartered territory
The New South Wales parliament has a problem with men behaving badly. But more to the point, it seems to have an inability to deal with it. On Tuesday, the parliament will try to deal with two very different cases that share a common consequence: damage to its reputation as an institution. Despite being a convicted rapist in custody awaiting sentence, Gareth Ward, the MP for Kiama, remains a member of the Legislative Assembly, drawing a base salary of more than $170,000 courtesy of NSW taxpayers. Labor plans to move a motion to have him expelled when parliament resumes on Tuesday and the opposition has said it will support it. Expelling Ward will almost certainly lead to more litigation, especially as the government will probably try to call a byelection in his south coast seat soon after. Sign up: AU Breaking News email But first to backtrack a little. Most politicians being investigated or facing criminal charges choose to resign, or their parties put the pressure on the MP to draw a line under their faltering political career. But Ward has toughed it out and continues to claim his innocence, despite being convicted for serious sex offences against two young men. He was suspended and left the Liberal party in 2022 after being charged with sex offences. He then ran as an independent in the 2023 state election and was returned by the voters of Kiama. Now that he has been convicted, he faces a potential sentence of more than five years. Under section 13A of the NSW constitution, a person is ineligible to be an MP if they are convicted of an offence punishable by five years or more. But it's only counted as a conviction once the person has reached the end of the appeals process and has not had their conviction overturned, constitutional expert Prof Anne Twomey says – and Ward has confirmed he plans to appeal the verdict. The appeals process could take years. The other route is expulsion. The NSW constitution does not give a specific power to expel a member, but Twomey says there is an inherent power for the NSW parliament to expel an MP to protect itself and its proper functioning. This appears to be where the premier, Chris Minns, is headed – but it is relatively untested territory. The courts have ruled that expulsion must not be as punishment, but it can be done to protect public confidence in the integrity of the parliament. If Ward is expelled, a byelection would need to be held to replace him, which only adds to the complications. Would Ward seek an injunction to prevent the byelection while he appeals both the expulsion and the criminal conviction? Understandably, there are few cases to guide the way – the last time an MP was expelled from the NSW lower house was in 1917. But what is certain is that unless Ward resigns voluntarily, litigation appears inevitable. The first stop will be the supreme court, followed by a possible high court appeal. For those who want a deeper dive, Twomey's podcast, Constititional Clarion, explores all the twists and turns that could emerge over coming weeks. The controversial independent upper house member Mark Latham is also under the microscope but for entirely different reasons. The former One Nation MP is under scrutiny over his use of privilege within the chamber and his general standard of behaviour, which Labor has been calling out of late. Has the Minns government suddenly found a new moral rectitude? Or is the premier motivated by more base political considerations? Latham has been working with the opposition and crossbench to block changes to workers compensation legislation that the government dearly wants passed. In parliament, Minns has called him 'one of the most shameful bigots in NSW' who has an 'odious Twitter account', which he deployed for a 'disgusting homophobic attack' on independent MP Alex Greenwich. More recently prurient allegations about Latham's personal life have spilled into the public domain due to a relationship breakdown, which have added fuel to the fire of outrage. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion These are the subject of a case seeking a domestic violence order that he is vehemently contesting. As the relationship degenerated, allegations from court filings including leaked texts about female MPs and other unsavoury exchanges have found their way into the public domain. Latham's behaviour raises questions of respect for the parliament and female MPs, and whether the behaviour is appropriate in any workplace. Latham allegedly covertly photographed female workmates and shared the images with derogatory commentary. If true, in any other workplace, that would at the least prompt counselling, a warning or possibly dismissal. Then there is Latham's use of parliamentary privilege. Privilege exists to allow politicians to speak freely without fear of defamation, but Latham arguably pushes its limits. He is a blunt, borderline-rude interrogator of witnesses before committees. In the chamber he has used privilege to attack his enemies, such as Greenwich, who won a $140,000 defamation settlement against Latham in 2024, and domestic violence campaigner Rosie Batty. Last month Latham outraged colleagues by talking about Greenwich's medical records, which had been produced as part of a separate case Greenwich has brought against Latham in the NSW civil and administrative tribunal. But can the upper house actually mete out a punishment or persuade Latham to alter his behaviour? The answer is probably no. Labor plans to move two motions in the next sitting period, which starts on Tuesday: one relating to a specific breach of privilege and another more general censure. Labor will allege that Latham breached privilege in relation to certain documents about the former police commissioner Karen Webb and investigations into gifts of gin that were produced on the basis that only parliamentarians could view them. Labor wants Latham referred to the privileges committee for breaching the order, something he disputes. The allegations of exposing medical records, taking covert photos and perhaps other actions are likely to be wrapped up into a censure motion condemning his behaviour. But as for meaningful outcomes, don't hold your breath. The privileges committee could recommend an apology or perhaps a suspension, but that is rare. Labor lost control of this powerful committee a month ago after a dispute with the crossbench and the opposition. They combined to cut a Labor member so control of the now seven-member committee is out of Labor's hands. And what of a censure? It is likely to be little more than a slap on the wrist for Latham, while he enjoys the notoriety and attention that this latest saga will bring. The problem for the NSW parliament is that its rules to set and enforce appropriate standards of behaviour are hopelessly outdated, its processes are archaic and it has failed to implement many of the recommendations from a report by Liz Broderick completed two years ago. The federal parliament has moved to establish a standards commission with real teeth to fine or even suspend parliamentarians for poor behaviour outside the chamber. It is still to be tested but it is a start. Instead, in NSW, we will spend weeks on the immediate crises that will further lower the parliament's standing in the public eye, without dealing with the real problem of cultural change that is sorely needed.
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
Attacks on the humanities at Australian universities are not new – but they are now more lethal
It's a question from a young graduate student that should chill every educated politician, public servant and university administrator to the bone. 'Why do they hate us so much?' It's a good question, and she hoped that Graeme Turner, the eminent professor of cultural studies who has recently published a scathing diagnosis of the condition of Australian universities, Broken: Universities, Politics and the Public Good, might be able to answer it. The brilliant student had recently embarked on a doctoral degree in the humanities, the pathway that for generations the brightest, most diligent and innovative students have been encouraged to take. People who later repaid the investment in their intellectual curiosity by making contributions that helped make the society healthier, more informed and inclusive, richer and more agile. But now it often feels like stepping on to a battlefield where the other side has the numbers, the KPIs and the money. Success is judged by the metrics, completion time, articles published, grants received – not the contribution to knowledge that was the purpose to the study. Academics in the humanities have been on the frontline of the huge job cuts, students have for more than a decade been taught by often underpaid casual staff who scoot from one gig campus to another to make an almost living wage, research funds have dwindled and the success rate for humanities applications fallen so low it is a lottery. And thanks to another of the poisonous legacies of the ill-fated, yet damaging, Morrison government, the fees to undertake a basic arts degree in the low-cost humanities have skyrocketed to $50,000. It's not surprising that in 2024 there were about 12,000 fewer students enrolled in culture and society programs than a decade earlier, and the number of students in creative arts degrees have dropped by a third over that decade. Sign up: AU Breaking News email The neoliberal economists were right – self-interest, especially when considering taking on a massive debt, can win. Those least able to countenance such indebtedness are the distant relatives of those who in previous generations were able to transform their lives by taking the opportunities presented by commonwealth and teacher's scholarships, free and low-cost university study. As Jacqui Lambie said in her scathing attack on the Job Ready Graduates scheme when it was introduced by the Morrison government, 'I'll be damned if I'll vote to tell those kids in rural and regional areas of Tasmania that they deserve to have their opportunities suffocated … no matter how gifted, no matter how determined'. Australia's long-term success and global influence is due more to its educated people than the resources beneath the soil. Attacks on the humanities are not new, but they are now more lethal as the routines of corporate logic have been instrumentalised by university managements keen to squeeze the last penny out of challenged operational budgets, while capital budgets continue to be deployed to rebuild campuses as five-star resorts. There are huge paradoxes at the centre of the attack on the universities here and around the world. The US administration advocates freedom of speech but academics there are often too afraid to send emails to colleagues that might be discovered and interpreted as criticism of the government; research that might challenge is cancelled; visiting international fellows are advised not to leave the US for conferences for fear they may not be allowed to return. The chill is at odds with the purpose of education – to expand the mind, increase opportunities, build better civilisations. We are living with an epidemic of moral injury as we watch the devastation in Gaza and the obsequious responses of world leaders to the US president. We need the guidance of moral philosophers more than ever. The study of religion, philosophy, history, literature and music were key foundation stones of the ancient universities and their replicas in colonial Australia. It is in these places that scholars and students have for centuries mastered and created knowledge. It is this huge legacy of thought and analysis, art and story-telling, that is now being used to train the large language models of generative artificial intelligence. AI may yet be as transformative as its boosters suggest, but it would not be possible without the humanities and social sciences. These are the disciplines that have built the knowledge the bots are now mining. Yet when talking about the future, the dominant discourse is about business and science, not the content that essentially derives from the humanities and social sciences. The Jobs Ready Graduates scheme was one of the ways the Morrison government punished the universities, forcing them to make decisions that suited its poorly considered priorities. It also refused jobkeeper support to the sector despite its economic importance. At the time Labor opposed the policy and committed to revoke it on election. The higher education review commissioned by the Albanese government reinforced the assessment that this was poor policy. But it endures, even in a caucus where nearly half the members have an arts degree. Too hard, too expensive, not my responsibility are the mealy mouthed responses. Governments have allowed, and some would say encouraged, the corporate model of the university with its purposeless adoption of corporate strategies, to predominate. Intervening to change this is now hard, as parliamentary inquiries have shown. But if the pandemic taught us nothing else, it is that when the need is great, money can be found. Abolishing the punishing fees for arts degrees must be within reach if Australia seriously wants to actively participate in the information age and give this generation the opportunities we all need them to have. Julianne Schultz is emeritus professor media and culture at Griffith University and author of The Idea of Australia. She is a signatory to the Australian Historical Association's open letter
