01-07-2025
News can't go on simply making 'angry people furious'. People will tune out for good
"I've turned off all my news alerts, it's just too much and there's nothing I can do," said a woman to her friend.
"Message me if there's something I really need to know."
It's a conversation I overheard while in a supermarket queue recently.
And it's an increasingly common phenomenon. Even hardened news-passionate journalist friends of mine are struggling to read the news.
The University of Canberra recently released its report on digital media which - alarmingly - states that 69 per cent of those surveyed said that they try not to engage with general news coverage. And only 43 per cent of the 2000 people surveyed, said they trust the news.
We can't afford to look away. At a time of foment and instability, with the current conflicts in Iran, Gaza and Ukraine, we need to find ways of engaging in the world around us, without feeling overwhelmed.
It's time to rethink our approach to news coverage in a bid to rebuild trust in journalism and in evidence-based information.
The Constructive Institute in Aarhus, Denmark, has pioneered a journalistic approach which applies a constructive lens to news reporting.
Working with journalists and news organisations, via fellowships and partnerships, The Constructive Institute is quietly transforming news in Scandinavia and beyond, while also increasing engagement and trust in news.
Put simply, a constructive approach is future and solutions-focused, providing detailed context and nuance, never assuming knowledge.
Importantly, it encourages community engagement and dialogue around issues big and small.
A news colleague recently quipped that the motto in her newsroom is "We make angry people furious."
Constructive journalism is an antidote to that oppositional paradigm of he/she/they said reporting, which adds little beyond inflaming an issue.
In many Scandinavian newsrooms, constructive journalism is being deliberately applied, including through innovative formats in which all interviews and debates are solutions-focused.
Imagine, and this is happening there, diametrically opposed politicians and stakeholders coming onto a debate program.
They are there because they have agreed to a constructive format, focused on moving an issue forward.
At the end of the discussion, they must have agreed on several concrete actions towards a solution, with shared accountability for delivery.
And there is strong audience input and feedback throughout.
Can you imagine any political debate where those are the rules, and that's how it plays out? Where solutions are the goal rather than taking down the opponent at all costs.
As one of the news leaders responsible for rolling out this format observed, it has revitalised engagement with the public, and it is a far more rewarding experience for politicians, subject matter experts and those impacted by a particular issue because conflict has been replaced with a focus on outcomes.
And - this is key - the interviewees return, months or weeks later, to update the public on their, collective, progress. Accountability in action.
What's in it for news organisations? Audiences.
According to the Constructive Institute, constructive journalism has led to increased news engagement, according to former Danish news executive and founder of the Constructive Institute, Ulrik Haagrup, interviewed in 2020 by DW News.
While Scandinavia is leading the way, Australia is hot on its heels. Every day, across our local platforms, mastheads, news feeds, programs and services there are powerful examples of constructive reporting, with many innovative journalists and news leaders recognising that readers, viewers and listeners are hungry for a new approach to news.
At Monash, we have joined with our colleagues in Denmark to expand the work of the Constructive Institute by elevating and learning from the inspiring work already under way here; and through fellowships and partnerships to further explore constructive journalism initiatives in Australia, Asia and the Pacific; and importantly to measure the impact such an editorial shift can have on audiences and on the bottom line for media organisations.
Cleverly, the University of Canberra Digital Media Survey asked participants how trust in news could be improved.
What they found in many ways reflects what the Constructive Institute is aiming to do to engage and trust in the media there must be more: facts and accuracy (26 per cent), less bias and opinion (24 per cent), more breadth and depth in reporting (17 per cent), greater transparency and accountability (15 per cent), increased verification (9 per cent), and more independence from commercial and political interests (9 per cent).
Increased news avoidance is not inevitable. And, frankly, it is dangerous.
In times of conflict, we must be informed, and the move towards more constructive journalism can help achieve that.
"I've turned off all my news alerts, it's just too much and there's nothing I can do," said a woman to her friend.
"Message me if there's something I really need to know."
It's a conversation I overheard while in a supermarket queue recently.
And it's an increasingly common phenomenon. Even hardened news-passionate journalist friends of mine are struggling to read the news.
The University of Canberra recently released its report on digital media which - alarmingly - states that 69 per cent of those surveyed said that they try not to engage with general news coverage. And only 43 per cent of the 2000 people surveyed, said they trust the news.
We can't afford to look away. At a time of foment and instability, with the current conflicts in Iran, Gaza and Ukraine, we need to find ways of engaging in the world around us, without feeling overwhelmed.
It's time to rethink our approach to news coverage in a bid to rebuild trust in journalism and in evidence-based information.
The Constructive Institute in Aarhus, Denmark, has pioneered a journalistic approach which applies a constructive lens to news reporting.
Working with journalists and news organisations, via fellowships and partnerships, The Constructive Institute is quietly transforming news in Scandinavia and beyond, while also increasing engagement and trust in news.
Put simply, a constructive approach is future and solutions-focused, providing detailed context and nuance, never assuming knowledge.
Importantly, it encourages community engagement and dialogue around issues big and small.
A news colleague recently quipped that the motto in her newsroom is "We make angry people furious."
Constructive journalism is an antidote to that oppositional paradigm of he/she/they said reporting, which adds little beyond inflaming an issue.
In many Scandinavian newsrooms, constructive journalism is being deliberately applied, including through innovative formats in which all interviews and debates are solutions-focused.
Imagine, and this is happening there, diametrically opposed politicians and stakeholders coming onto a debate program.
They are there because they have agreed to a constructive format, focused on moving an issue forward.
At the end of the discussion, they must have agreed on several concrete actions towards a solution, with shared accountability for delivery.
And there is strong audience input and feedback throughout.
Can you imagine any political debate where those are the rules, and that's how it plays out? Where solutions are the goal rather than taking down the opponent at all costs.
As one of the news leaders responsible for rolling out this format observed, it has revitalised engagement with the public, and it is a far more rewarding experience for politicians, subject matter experts and those impacted by a particular issue because conflict has been replaced with a focus on outcomes.
And - this is key - the interviewees return, months or weeks later, to update the public on their, collective, progress. Accountability in action.
What's in it for news organisations? Audiences.
According to the Constructive Institute, constructive journalism has led to increased news engagement, according to former Danish news executive and founder of the Constructive Institute, Ulrik Haagrup, interviewed in 2020 by DW News.
While Scandinavia is leading the way, Australia is hot on its heels. Every day, across our local platforms, mastheads, news feeds, programs and services there are powerful examples of constructive reporting, with many innovative journalists and news leaders recognising that readers, viewers and listeners are hungry for a new approach to news.
At Monash, we have joined with our colleagues in Denmark to expand the work of the Constructive Institute by elevating and learning from the inspiring work already under way here; and through fellowships and partnerships to further explore constructive journalism initiatives in Australia, Asia and the Pacific; and importantly to measure the impact such an editorial shift can have on audiences and on the bottom line for media organisations.
Cleverly, the University of Canberra Digital Media Survey asked participants how trust in news could be improved.
What they found in many ways reflects what the Constructive Institute is aiming to do to engage and trust in the media there must be more: facts and accuracy (26 per cent), less bias and opinion (24 per cent), more breadth and depth in reporting (17 per cent), greater transparency and accountability (15 per cent), increased verification (9 per cent), and more independence from commercial and political interests (9 per cent).
Increased news avoidance is not inevitable. And, frankly, it is dangerous.
In times of conflict, we must be informed, and the move towards more constructive journalism can help achieve that.
"I've turned off all my news alerts, it's just too much and there's nothing I can do," said a woman to her friend.
"Message me if there's something I really need to know."
It's a conversation I overheard while in a supermarket queue recently.
And it's an increasingly common phenomenon. Even hardened news-passionate journalist friends of mine are struggling to read the news.
The University of Canberra recently released its report on digital media which - alarmingly - states that 69 per cent of those surveyed said that they try not to engage with general news coverage. And only 43 per cent of the 2000 people surveyed, said they trust the news.
We can't afford to look away. At a time of foment and instability, with the current conflicts in Iran, Gaza and Ukraine, we need to find ways of engaging in the world around us, without feeling overwhelmed.
It's time to rethink our approach to news coverage in a bid to rebuild trust in journalism and in evidence-based information.
The Constructive Institute in Aarhus, Denmark, has pioneered a journalistic approach which applies a constructive lens to news reporting.
Working with journalists and news organisations, via fellowships and partnerships, The Constructive Institute is quietly transforming news in Scandinavia and beyond, while also increasing engagement and trust in news.
Put simply, a constructive approach is future and solutions-focused, providing detailed context and nuance, never assuming knowledge.
Importantly, it encourages community engagement and dialogue around issues big and small.
A news colleague recently quipped that the motto in her newsroom is "We make angry people furious."
Constructive journalism is an antidote to that oppositional paradigm of he/she/they said reporting, which adds little beyond inflaming an issue.
In many Scandinavian newsrooms, constructive journalism is being deliberately applied, including through innovative formats in which all interviews and debates are solutions-focused.
Imagine, and this is happening there, diametrically opposed politicians and stakeholders coming onto a debate program.
They are there because they have agreed to a constructive format, focused on moving an issue forward.
At the end of the discussion, they must have agreed on several concrete actions towards a solution, with shared accountability for delivery.
And there is strong audience input and feedback throughout.
Can you imagine any political debate where those are the rules, and that's how it plays out? Where solutions are the goal rather than taking down the opponent at all costs.
As one of the news leaders responsible for rolling out this format observed, it has revitalised engagement with the public, and it is a far more rewarding experience for politicians, subject matter experts and those impacted by a particular issue because conflict has been replaced with a focus on outcomes.
And - this is key - the interviewees return, months or weeks later, to update the public on their, collective, progress. Accountability in action.
What's in it for news organisations? Audiences.
According to the Constructive Institute, constructive journalism has led to increased news engagement, according to former Danish news executive and founder of the Constructive Institute, Ulrik Haagrup, interviewed in 2020 by DW News.
While Scandinavia is leading the way, Australia is hot on its heels. Every day, across our local platforms, mastheads, news feeds, programs and services there are powerful examples of constructive reporting, with many innovative journalists and news leaders recognising that readers, viewers and listeners are hungry for a new approach to news.
At Monash, we have joined with our colleagues in Denmark to expand the work of the Constructive Institute by elevating and learning from the inspiring work already under way here; and through fellowships and partnerships to further explore constructive journalism initiatives in Australia, Asia and the Pacific; and importantly to measure the impact such an editorial shift can have on audiences and on the bottom line for media organisations.
Cleverly, the University of Canberra Digital Media Survey asked participants how trust in news could be improved.
What they found in many ways reflects what the Constructive Institute is aiming to do to engage and trust in the media there must be more: facts and accuracy (26 per cent), less bias and opinion (24 per cent), more breadth and depth in reporting (17 per cent), greater transparency and accountability (15 per cent), increased verification (9 per cent), and more independence from commercial and political interests (9 per cent).
Increased news avoidance is not inevitable. And, frankly, it is dangerous.
In times of conflict, we must be informed, and the move towards more constructive journalism can help achieve that.
"I've turned off all my news alerts, it's just too much and there's nothing I can do," said a woman to her friend.
"Message me if there's something I really need to know."
It's a conversation I overheard while in a supermarket queue recently.
And it's an increasingly common phenomenon. Even hardened news-passionate journalist friends of mine are struggling to read the news.
The University of Canberra recently released its report on digital media which - alarmingly - states that 69 per cent of those surveyed said that they try not to engage with general news coverage. And only 43 per cent of the 2000 people surveyed, said they trust the news.
We can't afford to look away. At a time of foment and instability, with the current conflicts in Iran, Gaza and Ukraine, we need to find ways of engaging in the world around us, without feeling overwhelmed.
It's time to rethink our approach to news coverage in a bid to rebuild trust in journalism and in evidence-based information.
The Constructive Institute in Aarhus, Denmark, has pioneered a journalistic approach which applies a constructive lens to news reporting.
Working with journalists and news organisations, via fellowships and partnerships, The Constructive Institute is quietly transforming news in Scandinavia and beyond, while also increasing engagement and trust in news.
Put simply, a constructive approach is future and solutions-focused, providing detailed context and nuance, never assuming knowledge.
Importantly, it encourages community engagement and dialogue around issues big and small.
A news colleague recently quipped that the motto in her newsroom is "We make angry people furious."
Constructive journalism is an antidote to that oppositional paradigm of he/she/they said reporting, which adds little beyond inflaming an issue.
In many Scandinavian newsrooms, constructive journalism is being deliberately applied, including through innovative formats in which all interviews and debates are solutions-focused.
Imagine, and this is happening there, diametrically opposed politicians and stakeholders coming onto a debate program.
They are there because they have agreed to a constructive format, focused on moving an issue forward.
At the end of the discussion, they must have agreed on several concrete actions towards a solution, with shared accountability for delivery.
And there is strong audience input and feedback throughout.
Can you imagine any political debate where those are the rules, and that's how it plays out? Where solutions are the goal rather than taking down the opponent at all costs.
As one of the news leaders responsible for rolling out this format observed, it has revitalised engagement with the public, and it is a far more rewarding experience for politicians, subject matter experts and those impacted by a particular issue because conflict has been replaced with a focus on outcomes.
And - this is key - the interviewees return, months or weeks later, to update the public on their, collective, progress. Accountability in action.
What's in it for news organisations? Audiences.
According to the Constructive Institute, constructive journalism has led to increased news engagement, according to former Danish news executive and founder of the Constructive Institute, Ulrik Haagrup, interviewed in 2020 by DW News.
While Scandinavia is leading the way, Australia is hot on its heels. Every day, across our local platforms, mastheads, news feeds, programs and services there are powerful examples of constructive reporting, with many innovative journalists and news leaders recognising that readers, viewers and listeners are hungry for a new approach to news.
At Monash, we have joined with our colleagues in Denmark to expand the work of the Constructive Institute by elevating and learning from the inspiring work already under way here; and through fellowships and partnerships to further explore constructive journalism initiatives in Australia, Asia and the Pacific; and importantly to measure the impact such an editorial shift can have on audiences and on the bottom line for media organisations.
Cleverly, the University of Canberra Digital Media Survey asked participants how trust in news could be improved.
What they found in many ways reflects what the Constructive Institute is aiming to do to engage and trust in the media there must be more: facts and accuracy (26 per cent), less bias and opinion (24 per cent), more breadth and depth in reporting (17 per cent), greater transparency and accountability (15 per cent), increased verification (9 per cent), and more independence from commercial and political interests (9 per cent).
Increased news avoidance is not inevitable. And, frankly, it is dangerous.
In times of conflict, we must be informed, and the move towards more constructive journalism can help achieve that.
