In this op-ed, Lori Susko, founder of We Scout discusses how a shifting trust landscape is reshaping the role of earned media, and why credibility, responsibility and stronger relationships with journalists matter more than ever.
Ask any communications professional, and they will tell you the same thing: trust is harder to earn and easier to lose.
Confidence across brands is under pressure. Audiences are more sceptical, and both brands and media are navigating that reality. At the same time, misinformation spreads quickly, algorithms amplify conflict, and people are questioning what they see more than ever.
Journalism sits squarely within this environment.
This isn’t a story about journalism being broken, far from it. The craft of reporting, investigating, verifying and holding power to account remains so very essential.
But the environment around it has changed. And for communications professionals who rely on earned media to build credibility, that shift is critical.
The Foundation of Earned Comms
Earned media rests on a simple idea: that when a publication covers a story, it carries more weight than when an organisation says it about itself. That independence is the point, and it’s what gives the earned comms model its value.
When a journalist chooses to write about a brand, person or issue, it signals that someone outside the organisation has assessed the information and deemed it newsworthy. That third-party validation is what creates credibility.
But credibility doesn’t on its own. It’s shaped by the broader trust environment — and that environment has become significantly more complex.
The Trust Gap
Recent Pew Research points to something communications professionals are already seeing play out in real time.
People still believe journalism plays an important role in society. That hasn’t changed. What has shifted is confidence in media institutions, as audiences navigate an information environment shaped by misinformation, political alignment and the speed of digital media. “Fake news” is no longer a fringe term, it’s embedded in how people interpret what they see.
Audiences are becoming more deliberate about where they place their trust and which sources they rely on.
For communications professionals, that distinction matters.
This isn’t about journalism losing its value, it hasn’t. It’s about understanding how credibility works in an environment where information is scrutinised and constantly in motion.
When Trust Becomes Narrow
People may be sceptical of “media” as a broad term while continuing to trust specific journalists, outlets or local news organisations whose work they might know well.
Pew research, for example, shows trust in local news organisations remains notably higher than trust in national outlets. That indicates audiences are not rejecting journalism as a whole. They are placing trust in places where they see familiarity, transparency and accountability.
But this shift toward familiarity carries its own implications. When trust concentrates around the sources we know best, the window through which we see the broader media landscape can narrow. In some ways, it begins to resemble the personalised information environments created by algorithms — where people rely heavily on a small number of trusted voices rather than engaging with a wider range of perspectives.
That new dynamic changes how audiences encounter information.
For communications professionals, this shift has implications. The relationship between earned media specialists and journalists has always been central to the earned media process. In a more fragmented trust environment, those relationships matter even more.
Credibility is increasingly built through consistent, thoughtful engagement with journalists who have earned the confidence of their audiences.
A Shared Information Environment
Communications professionals are not separate from the pressures facing journalism. At least, I would like to think we operate within the same information system.
Comms operators now significantly outnumber journalists globally. That means a large proportion of the information entering newsrooms originates from organisations, brands and institutions.
In a low-trust environment, volume can quickly become noise.
For those of us working in comms, that reality reinforces a professional responsibility: the information we put into the media system must be accurate, transparent and genuinely newsworthy.
Journalists rely on credible sources to do their work effectively. PR professionals rely on journalism’s independence to give earned media its value.
Protecting that relationship benefits both sides.
The Measurement Problem
There is another implication for the communications industry: the way we measure earned media success has not fully caught up to the changing trust environment.
For as long as I have worked in this industry, measurement effectiveness has been debated, but it now carries even more weight. Exposure alone tells us little about credibility.
A placement in a publication that audiences trust carries a different weight than exposure in an outlet they view with scepticism. Similarly, coverage written by a journalist whose reporting audiences consistently follow may have more influence than a broader but less trusted reach.
In other words, volume doesn’t mean credibility but influence and audience trust are important. How we accurately measure this though, is anyone’s guess.
The Responsibility of Comms in a Low-Trust Era
Comms professionals play an important role in shaping the information that audiences encounter. That proximity creates responsibility.
Accuracy in what we share matters. Transparency in what we disclose matters. Respect for editorial independence matters.
When that trust is maintained, earned media continues to function as one of the most effective ways organisations can communicate with the public.
Where This Leaves Us
Earned media still matters. That hasn’t changed. What has changed is the environment it operates in.
Trust is more fragile. Audiences are more selective. And the information people are navigating every day is more crowded and often more confusing than it used to be.
In that context, credibility becomes everything.
For those of us working in PR in Australia, that means being more deliberate in how we show up.
Journalism remains critically important. And making sure the information that flows into that system is accurate, responsible and genuinely useful is something we share responsibility for.
