We’ve been serving the wrong audience

The Olivia Nuzzi/RFK Jr. and Michael Wolff/Jeffrey Epstein scandals weren’t just breaches of journalism ethics — they were a mirror held up to something most of us already know, but don’t want to admit: We’ve gotten too close to the people we cover.

I get how it happens. When you’re covering the same beat for years, relationships develop. The city hall reporter builds trust with the mayor’s staff. The podcaster interviews a celebrity about his latest film — nothing more. The broadcast journalist lobs softball questions to a politician about her new book, not her voting record. We convince ourselves that access will draw audiences.

But this is happening while everything else is collapsing. We’re bare-bones teams trying to do accountability journalism with half the staff we had five years ago, while learning AI tools and begging people to subscribe or donate. Maintaining relationships with sources doesn’t just feel helpful — it feels essential.

Meanwhile, people are trying to figure out why rent went up 30 percent or why their kid’s school lost its art program. We’re covering insider politics and process stories. Trust in media hit historic lows this year. Lower-income news consumers increasingly trust partisan podcasters over us because those voices talk about things that actually matter to them.

Here’s my prediction for 2026: Some news organizations will realize the trust crisis and the business model crisis are the same thing. We’re losing audience, losing funding, and losing younger audiences — so what exactly are we protecting by maintaining the status quo?

The outlets that figure this out won’t be more ethical than the rest of us. They’ll just recognize that access journalism isn’t working anymore, and maybe it never did. If AI can help us create first drafts of meeting recaps and other rote stories, actual humans can focus on the investigative work that can’t be automated — reporting that requires showing up, asking uncomfortable questions and living in the communities we cover.

This means being honest about what we’re focusing on. Are we covering things because they matter to people, or because other journalists think they’re important? Are we building source relationships to hold people accountable or to maintain access that serves our own needs?

The outlets that make this shift will lose some access. The PR rep or party hack will be less friendly and responsive. The mayor’s office will freeze them out. But they might rebuild something more valuable: trust with people who want journalism to help them understand what’s happening in their communities.

We can keep serving sources, or we can admit that nobody trusts us because we’ve been serving the wrong audience. In 2026, some of us will finally pick a side.