This past election cycle has again raised questions about the viability of news outlets, and how audiences are consuming information.

New research indicates Minnesota's media landscape is on solid footing, even with some challenges.

The University of Minnesota's Minnesota Journalism Center issued a report on the state's local news ecosystem.

Like many other towns and cities across the country, there are concerns about outlets shutting down because of dwindling ad revenue.

More than 12% of all local outlets in Minnesota have closed since 2018. But the center's Director, Ben Toff, said there is hope.

"We have a lot of new news organizations that have launched over the last six or seven years," said Toff, "to - in many cases - try to fill in some of the gaps where there have been closures."

He points to the growth of nonprofit publications that have an online focus and help inform underserved populations.

In Minnesota, they represent more than one-in-five new outlets founded since 2018.

Toff acknowledged a bigger presence of outlets that bill themselves as local news providers, but are sometimes very partisan.

He said they tend to push out press releases or articles generated by artificial intelligence.

For rural communities, Toff stressed the importance of finding solutions as their publications struggle to keep operating.

He said without enough local reporters, community members are left in the dark about events that have a big impact on their lives.

"Whether it's schools and education policy, or public health, or natural disasters," said Toff, "there's a lot of really important local information the people depend on."

Toff said in cases where there aren't resources helping to fill the gaps, community members will have to turn to government Facebook pages and radio stations to hopefully stay informed.

Meanwhile, his team's research finds that Minnesota is setting the tone by seeing a broad philanthropic effort to mobilize more funding of local news, with the traditional commercial-structured model continuing to navigate challenges.




get more stories like this via email

By Hevin Wilkey / Broadcast version by Farah Siddiqi reporting for the Kent State NewsLab-Ohio News Connection Collaboration.

Kamala Harris has extensively used social media during her presidential campaign to target a key demographic in this election, Generation Z.

Patrick Houlihan, president of the College Democrats of Ohio and a senior political science major at Miami of Ohio University, said Harris' social media posts have aided in getting people of all demographics, but Gen Z in particular, to understand her policies and who she is.

"She feels like a person," Houlihan said. "She doesn't feel like a politician. That's, well, she does feel like a politician, but she feels like not a robot."

To Houlihan, Harris represents hope and a new age for a younger U.S. government.

Since Harris became the Democratic nominee, there has been an uptick in young voters who are more excited to vote.

UCLA produced a study on Gen Z's motivation and favor to vote in the presidential election. They found that nearly half of respondents were not initially motivated to vote before Harris's nomination, but a third of that group became motivated to vote for Harris.

Once Harris announced her candidacy, she immediately started her campaign, which included strategizing social media.

TikTok account "Kamalahq" has racked in nearly 5 million followers since its first post in February, then named "Bidenhq." The account switched names the day Harris announced that she would be taking Joe Biden's spot seeking the nomination of the Democratic party.

She then quickly adopted videos and edits featuring songs like "Feminimonemon" by Chappell Roan and visuals similar to "Brat" by Charli XCX.

Through various videos such as edits, memes (both uplifting herself and making fun of Donald Trump), clips of speeches from her own page and regular TikTok users, she aimed to connect with a new demographic.

J. Cherie Strachan, a professor and director of the Ray J. Bliss Institute of Applied Politics at the University of Akron, teaches various political science classes. She works with a mix of undergraduate and graduate students and sees their interests and thoughts firsthand.

"I think [college voices] make or break, right?" Strachan said. "This is a margin of error race, for the presidency at least. Harris needs to not only match the youth support that Biden got four years ago, but if possible, increase it."

Harris is reaching Gen Z Americans through social media, where many of them get their news, according to the Pew Research Center.

A September Harvard Youth Poll reported that out of the 53% of young adults who have seen memes and social media associated with Kamala Harris, 34% say it positively influenced their opinions of her. This poll shows +24 to +33 point leads to Donald Trump in empathy, honesty, reliability and other issues like abortion and climate change.

"No matter if Harris wins or loses, there are going to be thousands of strategists all across the country looking at her campaign trying to figure out what went right, what went wrong," Houlihan said. "One of those things that is probably going to go right and it's going to get duplicated is the social media strategy."

More specifically, the quick, rapid response technique is what is working in his opinion. Harris has found a way to quickly put out indirect statements at any given time in reference to what Trump is saying about her, who is endorsing her, what events and interviews she's doing, et cetera.

To Houlihan, every effort counts, but others don't think social media will be enough for Harris to win.

Malcolm Neitenbach, president of Kent State University's College Republicans and senior psychology major, understands just how much of an impact social media has in elections now more than ever. He said Trump began the trend of candidates using social media in campaigns with Twitter in 2016 and an overall increase in its use with both Biden and Trump in 2020.

"With social media, just the power of reaching these mass groups of people online is changing how politics works nowadays," Neitenbach said. "It's just going to get more prevalent. It's going to be more normalized."

Professor Strachan thinks using social media is strategic in the same way as presidential candidates going to swing states and trying to get any and every possible voter on their side.

"Realizing that the campaign had some weak spots with [swing] voters and, you know, going meeting them where they are." Strachan said. "The same with the memes and the things on social media, if that's where young people are, and we know that that's where you get your news ... Then that's where you go."


This collaboration is produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

The Missouri Broadcasters Association is among the parties filing a lawsuit, claiming a state law that requires extensive redactions in court documents is unconstitutional.

The lawsuit, filed in Jefferson City, challenges a law passed last year that mandates attorneys and judicial officers redact the names of all witnesses and victims in lawsuits and criminal proceedings.

Dave Roland, president and CEO of the Freedom Center of Missouri, represents the plaintiffs. He said these restrictions severely limit the news media's ability to effectively monitor the judicial system - which in turn harms the public. He added the law also has cost implications.

"The redaction requirement dramatically increases the cost of litigation, such that it is putting certain types of legal actions and certain motions beyond the financial capacity of a number of litigants," he said.

Roland added the plaintiffs agree that in some situations - involving children, or sexual assault - names should be kept private. But they contend a blanket law to redact all names violates both the Missouri and U.S. Constitutions.

The bill was spearheaded by Rep. Justin Hicks, R-St. Louis. A hearing date for the case has not yet been set.

Chad Mahoney, president and CEO the Missouri Broadcasters Association, voiced concerns about the law's impact on journalists' ability to report accurately.

"We support protecting those who need to be protected for their safety, but we think this goes way too far. It's making it very difficult for journalists to do their jobs and to fully inform the public," he continued.

Mahoney said historically, the courts have been the most open and transparent branch of government, and that has changed with some of these recent actions.


get more stories like this via email

O.J. Simpson's death has the nation looking back on the infamous murder trial that resulted in his acquittal. Experts say one of the lasting impacts is news coverage and how people consume it.

The lengthy trial proceedings from the mid-1990s were televised, setting a pathway for cameras in the courtroom.

Jane Kirtley, a professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota's Hubbard School of Journalism, said it also ushered in a cottage industry of pundits brought in to analyze the events of each day. That made it easier for people to get a recap during a 24-hour news cycle, but she added that there was a drawback to getting so much information through analysis.

"It also meant that people could suspend their critical thinking, to a certain extent," she said, "and I believe we're still seeing that today. The rise of social media has only made it easier."

However, she said it did expose issues with how criminal cases are handled, and viewers were able to see it firsthand. Given how the accessibility of information has exploded since the trial, Kirtley said, news consumers can't lose sight of the need to examine where they're getting it from. That includes whether the source is producing the news themselves, and if the details are being vetted.

Tessa Jolls, president and CEO of the Center for Media Literacy, said the trial firmly established entertainment as a core element of news coverage, making it profitable. She said outlets still have to reel people in with this approach to survive in a challenging landscape, but added that a sensationalized case such as this one sometimes helps with engagement in a positive way.

"They were seeing what the news organizations chose to show, and that gave people a chance to talk to each other and compare notes," she said. "In that sense, I think people probably did become savvier."

The trial also touched on racial issues and domestic violence, and Jolls said it was natural for people to have strong emotions about the developments. But she noted that it serves as a reminder for audiences to not let their gut feelings cloud how they weigh the facts presented to them.

"We need to see that our emotions are definitely present and that they may be swaying our thinking," she said, "and so, it's important to ask questions, to be skeptical."


get more stories like this via email