Bridging Divides: Amy Mitchell on Shaping Journalism & Media Policy for the Digital Age

FMC Fast Chat takes you inside the news so you can be in the know in 30 minutes. Hosted by Fair Media Council CEO and Executive Director Jaci Clement, Fast Chat features notables in news, media, and business.

Thanks for joining us, everyone, and welcome back to another episode of FMC Fast Chat. I'm your host, Jaci Clement, and joining us today is Amy Mitchell. The founding executive director of the Center for News Technology and Innovation. Amy is a global thought leader in news innovation and algorithmic accountability. With 25 years at the Pew Research Center, she's— she helped shape how we understand the evolving relationship between news technology and the public. Amy, thank you so much for joining us today.

Pleasure to be here, Jaci.

So there's so much to talk to you about. But I want to begin with really a basic question, which is what led you to found the center to begin with? Sure.

It's a great question. So, you know, in my time doing research and helping to develop the news information kind of technology area of work at Pew Research Center, I was thinking about where did we need more and next, you know, areas of real need. And I felt like we needed to to do a better job of bridging a few areas. And one is when I looked at the discussions around the critical issues really at the intersection of journalism and technology, of which there are many today, that we were having a hard time as a society making much progress. And in many cases we're going backwards. And I thought we needed to do a couple of things differently. And one was as researchers, We needed to do a better job of synthesizing what we all know. What does the research add up to? What does it not add up to? Where do we need to do more research? As I would share findings with, you know, folks in the policy space or who, or wherever, I thought, how does one make sense of this? It's hard even as a researcher to really get a sense of what do we know. So to be able to be a synthesizing body in addition to continuing to do original new research. And the other is that I found there were most conversations were happening with one part of the diagram, right? Maybe it was a group of journalists or policymakers or technologists, but rarely were folks in the room together really, really, you know, kind of digging into the challenging elements of these issues and how each of those facets of this relationship can be thoughtful about ways to move forward. So getting people in the room together. And, and then having more global awareness, even as each country passes its own policies and thinks about these issues in unique ways. Well, there's a lot to learn from each other. And there's a lot that we're all experiencing that one, it interrelates because news in the digital space does not have the geographic bounds that our policies in our countries do, but also just in terms of learning to be able to appreciate what each other is experiencing. And to try to think about how those issues interconnect. So that's really what the foundation of CNTI is, is to be a global policy research center, but one that uses research and collaboration and convenings to try to have thoughtful discussions that lead to more informed discussions in the space of policy. And by policy, I'd also say it's policy both, you know, legislative, true legislative policy and others that may be, you know, practices and, and practices that are adopted across, you know, industry standards and things like that that maybe are not legally— legal efforts.

That's a whole lot to take on.

It is. Yeah. Yeah.

It's early 2025. A whole lot is already happening in the digital landscape with Meta announcing it will no longer do content moderation. Are there any particular issues that are front-burner issues for you that you're working on right now?

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, this is such a critical time and content moderation is hugely complicated and hard. And we as a society need to figure out how we're going to manage digital content as we move into the future. The 3 issues that we put forward as front and center as we headed into our first full year in 2024 were AI and journalism because there's so much that's happening and looking at it. Not only from sort of tools and how does one potentially build uses, but to think about the balancing. And this is really the approach that we take to try to take to all of the issues is enabling the benefits while guarding against the harm. So how do we balance where things can be a helpful part of society in a helpful way as we get to safeguarding an independent press and the public's access to a plurality of news? Those are kind of the cornerstone areas that we really seek to safeguard and enable. And then certainly cyber safety and security of journalists, online harms, cyber safety. We are seeing increased threats and abuse against journalists. And in our conversations, a real sense of a lack of knowledge or sense of confidence about what to do about how to address those. And then also in the space of disinformation, as we're heading into both with the advance of AI in the news information space, but really more broadly, the challenges of expression in the digital arena and how does one put barriers, you know, that the lawful but awful, and how do we help advance the recognition of the work of journalism and factual information and sharing. And then Overarching all of that has been a really interesting area of exploration, which has been around defining journalism today and thinking about it both inside policy as well as how the public defines it and how journalists themselves define it. So we did a 4-country public survey, we did a journalist survey, we've done a number of policy analyses. We looked at 23 pieces of media revenue policy really from that standpoint of how is journalism being defined, what kind of journalism would be or is being built into the future through these policies with that lens of full sustainability of journalism and enabling an informed public.

As I would actually argue that a lot of what's being done out there isn't journalism at all. You know, so I don't know if you're seeing a greater divide happening between, there's a whole lot of content, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's journalism.

Yeah. One of the things in it, so we started with some focus groups and one of the things that we saw in these focus groups in 4 countries, it was the US, Brazil, Australia, and South Africa. And it was really interesting that people seemed to appreciate a difference and a real sense that journalism is mission-oriented. It is more thorough. It is researched. It, it, it is really serving with a goal of informing. One of the things that was interesting though that we saw was that people felt all kinds of individuals could produce journalism. And so there's a distinction between news and journalism, but it's not necessarily that which is bounded by an organization or, you know, some other criteria like that that's coming in externally. And so I think as we, as we, you know, those in the, in journalism producers and those that are really providing that hard work of reporting to think about how do we put that forward? How do we explain the difference of what this information is to the public? Inside policy language, the definitions range all over the place in terms of who's being put into that bucket. And it's really important to be both aware, first off, but also thoughtful about How do we ensure that the diversity, for example, that the internet helped bring about, right? There's a lot of that's happened that's not good in the digital space. One of the things it did do in those, in those early years was open up the path for minority voices, for people to find kinds of news and journalism, for small independent entities to be able to emerge and, and, and, and do some really important reporting, investigative work singularly focused in a particular area, perhaps. Perhaps. So how do we ensure as we move into the future that we are safeguarding that diversity at the same time that we're trying to put certain boundaries around other areas?

Yeah.

And I'm, I'm talking to, you know, the expert here when I say everything we see in terms of research that's done with the public and public reaction and basic public sentiment about news today is What they want is factual information and credibility. But yet we seem to have a huge, you know, gap between what's being produced and what people are finding is factual and whether or not they should believe it. And, you know, right now as we talk, the wildfires in California continue. There's a lot of misinformation coming out on social media. There are people talking about fake videos that have been produced and just A lot of disinformation going out designed to scare people and really harm society. So what do, what do you see as key in, in kind of turning this around and helping us draw a roadmap for the future of news and media?

One of the things that we write about in one of these focus group insight pieces is that to be an informed member of society today, Is actually a lot more work than it used to be.

Yeah.

It's not less work. We have more access to things. We have a plethora of avenues we can go down, but to sift through all that, it's a lot more work than it was. And people feel that. And I, part of what we heard was there's, there are certain things, topics, issues, events where those who are dedicated Are going to take the time to parse through, to do additional searches, to check. There's going to be a lot of areas where people don't. And so how do we ensure that those in those really important areas, not that anything isn't important, but, but that, that both people understand the importance and the work that it does take to be an informed part of society today and why that matters. And that we are able to, are there ways that we can signal certain kinds of content? You know, what are the ways that we can help people differentiate content in this space? And again, that's hard. These are not easy, you know, they're not easy answers inside all of these issues. But I think that's where we need to come together to figure out those challenges. Think about uses of AI, you know, in journalism. One of the areas of work that we've been doing, we've held a series 3 convenings now that are global in scope, and we have researchers and policymakers and journalists and technology folks. And they're really sort of day-long thought, you know, they're intense sessions. And one of the things we've been working on is about that communication to the public about those uses. And the public says, you know, we want transparency, we want to understand these kinds of things. But at the same time, research finds that certain types of labeling Can backfire and actually create distrust. And so what's the right, you know, what are those meaningful kinds of ways of communication? And for journalists to feel comfortable being able to take advantage of some of the opportunities technology can bring in being able to do their work, which is they're strapped for people and time and events are happening so fast. What are ways technology can be helpful? But to feel like confident in being able to do that and that the that that can create a relationship with the public as opposed to creating more disruption in that relationship.

Okay. Do you have any examples of labels that actually do harm?

Well, sure. So there's interesting research out there. And one of the things was if you just, just saying that this involved AI tended to automatically create a sense of, ugh, You know, distrust, that should be, that's probably bad as a, you know, as opposed to perhaps something that was more meaningful. And that was found in this, in this research that that was even the case if it was a news or coming from a news organization that that individual had turned to, you know, had relied on, that was one of their sources. So, you know, things like that. And, you know, there's a lot of focus on watermarks, which are really valuable in their own way. But not necessarily something that's going to be meaningful to the public, to the everyday public.

Okay. Now there's a lot of changes happening with algorithms. And I would say out of everything I've done in terms of talking to the public and writing and getting public feedback on things that I write about, algorithms seem to be one of the areas that the public really does not understand at all. Okay. Is there an easy way to explain what they are and how it impacts the information that you are getting versus not getting?

I mean, the algorithms all vary in the way they work. And what I would say, I do think algorithmic transparency and thinking about how do we advance the important kinds of transparency is an important topic. for discussion and consideration, both transparency for journalists to understand like how their content is being accessed or used, but also for the public. The most straightforward description is that what you're seeing is a result to a certain degree, what you have said you like or don't like, either through behavior or through choices that you have indicated. In when you became a member or something or signed on to something. So it's a, it's a mix of content that is responding to your previous behaviors. There's a lot of variation within that. That is the most straightforward way. In many cases, people do have more, they have certain choices. That they often may not even know they have, or take it that you do. You know, convenience is a big part of the equation for all things when it comes to information, news access, and all of that. In the lives we lead today, convenience is a, you know, it's certainly a factor.

Okay. How would you say technology has reshaped what the public trusts, or has it eliminated the public's ability to trust anything?

Well, I don't, I don't think, I don't know that technology itself, I mean, that's a tool, right? It's a, it's a tool. And so there are so many factors to what goes into both trust and distrust. So trust, the absence of trust is not always distrust. So the other, one of the other things certainly we've seen in, in the US, is that great increase in distrust, a rejection of kinds of information that's driven as much by politics as anything else. It's a combination of this sort of political separation in our country and being a two-party system can kind of feed into that, right? You know, one or the other, all kinds of choices digitally for where to go, what, what, what to— and so it's much easier to separate.

Right.

And if there's an inclination already to have a primary vehicle of separation be political, ideological, that you then are making choices that are kind of with people who think like you. So it just feeds all of that. And then the animosity that's come with that political partisanship feeds over into people's response to certain kinds of news. So that's, that's how technology, I mean, having Having that access, sure, that enables choice, but there's a lot of good in the enabling of choice too. And so a part of it is how do we as a society come to grips with the way we are going to communicate as a digital— in our digital future? I would say that in many ways, we have not yet grappled with the transition to digital as our primary means of intake and output of journalism, news, and information. And we need to do that. And we're now entering era 4 or whatever it is, you know, of that, from websites to social media to AI to all these things. And all of, I mean, we're basically living in these spaces and certainly young people in particular. It's just where they are. And so thinking about the way that we recognize different kinds of information and content, what we choose to share, being conscious about those choices, those are all, I think, a part of our digital future that we've really not taken the time to fully grapple with yet.

Do you think our education system is preparing people for what they're actually encountering? in real life today by their use of technology?

Well, I think, I mean, I'm not an educator and I think educators certainly are there trying real hard, you know, and so kudos to the work that educators are doing. I think there's, I think as we think about digital literacy, that's a hard area too. And I think there may be some new ways to expand and think about what does digital literacy really mean that's beyond some of the early forms of that curriculum, for lack of a better word, which is very valuable in many ways, but we're also kind of in a new era. So I am certainly not one that would want to judge what educators are doing. It's not the world I live in. But We all have to, and it's part of where I come back to the collaborative element. Like, it really does take people inside research and technology and those that are creators of journalism and news and information and the public themselves to think about how do we do this right?

Yeah. Yeah. And we also see technology evolving so quickly and schools tend to change slowly, which with curriculum and syllabi and, you know, researching before they make changes to what they're teaching. So that in and of itself, it just seems to be like the playing field isn't level in order to actually produce a society that is truly, you know, digital forward. Yeah.

And that's hard. I mean, it's a real challenge. And I would say, you know, many, many news organizations also, anything that's kind of at an organizational level and has these structures that are built in and kind of safeguarded, That change doesn't tend to come as fast. And so part of it is how do we adapt? There's, there are folks like Tom Wheeler's talked about what are the regulatory structures that are really going to function for us in this technologically forward society? And are those different than the kinds of ones we have in place now? Do those work anymore? Do we need to be thinking about something different? All of those questions, I think, are ones that should be on the table.

Yeah. And we hear a lot about the struggles happening at smaller news outlets, you know, the small newspapers, the old, you know, legacy papers in particular that are, you know, I've actually interviewed, I've done a series on newspapers that have been around over 100 years, you know, those small community weeklies that people rely on and basically take for granted. Do you, what do you see really in all of this? as the bright spot for them on how they can actually succeed?

I do think that local communities are critical to people's lives, and there's a lot of connective tissue there. And the way to find that community can often be through your journalism organizations, and it's where people are sharing ideas. I think there is also innovation. happening at some of those smaller local outlets in a way that is exciting and inviting people into the process in a way that, you know, is, is, is part of the, part of that relationship with the public is, is feeling truly that there's a relationship there. And that can happen. There's opportunity for some of that experimentation and also really, you know, direct relationships within communities at these smaller, in these smaller areas. And I think there's a lot of real exciting opportunity there. There's really interesting work being done, whether it's the Tiny News Collective or others that are experimenting with ways to really have people in the community be a part of the journalism and the journalism process. I think that's also something that many local news organizations have, have put real focus and energy into doing is to figuring out how are we sure we're listening and listening to everybody.

Okay. Are there any innovations at the top of your mind of exciting things we can point to, to say, this is a glimmer, or at least a hope into the future of where we're going and, and how media can better reflect what's actually happening in people's lives?

Well, I do think, I mean, I do think there's a lot of excitement in what people are trying and doing with AI. There are some ways that AI, as we've, you know, just had conversations in different, at some of these different convenings about how there's one way where one experiment somebody was building was on Okay, we did story 1 off of whatever news event happened in our local community.

Right.

What are AI, using an AI tool to help me think about, based on the community, the readers, what are 3 other really interesting follow-up kinds of stories to produce from this? And that's just helping generate ideas. It's not doing the work. It's not, but it, that, that can be a helpful way of thinking, ah, Okay, here are ways I can connect with more of the community by offering other elements to this story that would be of interest and of value to my audience.

Okay. Okay. Now, what one of the issues is algorithms as gatekeepers. You know, as, as much as we don't like the idea of Meta, you know, stopping content moderation, on the flip side of that, they were never really good at it anyway. How do we go about having gatekeeping, but also fulfilling, you know, the idea that this is a country where we value freedom of speech and freedom of the press?

You have hit on one of the trickiest questions facing us as a society. It's really hard. It is, it is hard. I mean, certainly it is important for platforms and those that are hosting this information To, you know, be showing some responsibility and care and concern about that content. It's— there's also a lot out there. So, you know, moderation is, is hard. And how do you— how can you both keep up with the content, make those decisions day after day, minute after minute? I don't have an answer there, but we have to talk about it.

Yeah.

And it is, it is one of those areas where I think We have to get in the room together and say, it's easy to point fingers and, you know, we have to call out things when they are not good that are being done. We also have to try to work together to a certain extent. And, and that does take care for the good of society. And so if ultimately we want to safeguard the ability enabling an informed public The sharing and open sharing of information and creativity. How do we do that today? That's a, that's a question that's not going to be answered in one conversation or two or one research study. But we do need to put resources towards that and try to get to a better place than where we are today.

Okay. Well, from your perspective, for your work, what resources do you need?

Well, I think these kinds of conversations. So certainly research. I mean, if we're looking specifically at sort of that information space, we've put out issue primers on disinformation, on algorithmic transparency, accountability on disinformation that try to lay out, and we update these quarterly, that say, what is the research to date? First of all, what makes this really hard? One of the areas in, if you look at online harassment, Online abuse, content rules, moderation can be a tool. You also hit, hit really quickly an area where it can be used against the press. And we did a study of a number of fake news, quote unquote, fake news policies around the world. And in the end, overall, it created much greater risk to press independence because it was around government control of information. And both press independence and the public's access to a plurality of news. So the first is to be educated, to look at what's in there, what does the research say, where is there opportunity for this to be a benefit, and what are the risks? And then to say, how do we balance this so we try to create more benefit than harm? And it's a really It's a really tricky area and we're not going to get rid of all the bad content. We're certainly not all the harm, you know, content that's aimed to be harmful. But how do we balance to try to guard against as much of it as we can? That's continuing to do research, making sure that research is shared in a way that's accessible to people, that's easy for people to understand, and that we then have conversations and we try things. And can say, you know, here, here are, here are things that, that are, that are possible paths forward. Let's see how they may work. And I would say again, to be sharing experiences across countries, to be learning from each other. There's a lot to learn from things people are trying in other areas. One of our friends at the center is, is in Nigeria and they're just doing some really interesting creative work to try to think about How can they get information out to people in a way that they can trust and how do they keep their journalists safe? Okay.

Any other countries that are doing something that you think is interesting that might work here?

Well, that's a very broad topic. I mean, I would say that we did a convening in Mexico City that was around online, both online and offline, safety and security of journalists. And the takeaways from that convening are really ones that are applicable everywhere. But it talked about, you know, what, what, what, where was there, where did regulation help and where had it been harmful for journalists? So things to be aware of, to be knowledgeable about. What are the ways, thinking about how is a news organization, do you get to a point where you don't send a journalist out because it's risky? Nobody wants to be there. How does it, how does a news organization make those decisions? When it comes to risk. And then global awareness, one of the things we talked about a lot was pressure. Global awareness can lead to greater global pressure, which can have an impact. And then overall was, well, there were 2 other things I'd say. One is this idea of cyber hygiene that basically some folks at Global Cyber Alliance that do work in this space talk about. And it's, it's, it's Basically saying that inside newsrooms, technology, knowledge of technology has to be something that's taught regularly like first aid and even probably more regularly than we all redo our first aid certification. But it just needs to be an integral part of how you are doing your everyday learning, training, and upkeep so that one, there's an ongoing knowledge, as you said, to keep up with the pace of technological change. Also so that journalists feel confident in their use and their understanding of technology. The more confident one feels in understanding it, the more confidence there is in the ability to manage it and to also protect oneself and to know when information you're putting out might be risky and when it's actually the best thing to do to be able to draw attention to something that's happening to you. So Those areas, and then also in being able to create public relevance. So all, so much of this comes back to having the public see what you're doing as important and, and as relevant, because if the public really cares, there's likely to be greater notice if something is being done against journalists and, and then greater action that's taken to Correct that. Okay.

Listening to you talk, you give me great hope for the future. I just want you to know that I'm so thrilled you're doing this work.

Well, good. I'm, I'm so glad. We look forward to continuing to do more.

How did this become your life's work of all the things in the world you could have done?

Oh, that's fascinating. Gosh, you know, it started probably way back in undergrad. I got involved in doing content analysis work for what was then Times Mirror Center and You know, I, I, I did work as a congressional research associate too. That was this relationship of Congress, the press, and the public. That was the name of the book with Norm Ornstein and Tom Mann back in the day. And to me, that relationship of the news media, the journalists, the public, and our government and government structures and institutions, that's kind of a core of society. And so figuring out the dynamics of that relationship. They're constantly changing and technology is sort of a tool, right? Mechanism within that, that brings about change. But it's that the core of that relationship that is really what enables a functioning society or not. So to me, keeping tabs on that and figuring out how we try to put that front and center is worth one's career.

The Fair Media Council is a 501 nonprofit organization advocating For quality news and working to create a media-savvy society. For more information about the Fair Media Council and upcoming Fast Chat shows, check out fairmediacouncil.org.

Thank you.