When you think about the people who produce news and journalism, what comes to mind? Perhaps a reporter with a mic and camera crew, the byline on a story from your favorite news organization, an anchor on a TV set. Turns out, this image is just one among an increasing number of possibilities. 

According to a recent Center for News, Technology & Innovation (CNTI) survey of 1,025 U.S. adults conducted September 12-21, 2024,¹ close to a quarter (22%) of U.S. adults get news and information online from individual creators or influencers regularly and about half (52%) do so at least occasionally. This report focuses primarily on the 22% who do so regularly and the ways they stand apart from — and in line with — other Americans. As with all CNTI research, this report was prepared by the research and professional staff of CNTI.

U.S. adults who regularly get news and information from influencers or content creators are as, if not more, dedicated to staying informed as other Americans. In fact, they turn to organizations more than to individuals and recognize journalism as something distinct from news. Indeed, Americans who regularly get news and information online from influencers and content creators are highly engaged news consumers who — like the rest of Americans — turn to a wide range of places and people for news. Unlike other Americans, they do not prioritize getting news from professional journalists above getting informed quickly.

They tend to be more technologically active than other Americans and have a more optimistic outlook on the future of the internet. They are also more optimistic about the potential impacts of AI on both their own ability to keep informed and journalists’ ability to report. 

Other than age, there are no significant demographic differences between those who regularly consume news and information from individual content creators or influencers and other Americans. Younger people are somewhat more likely to regularly or occasionally get information from influencers or content creators, but the age differences are small. Educational backgrounds and politics are largely the same among all groups.

U.S. adults who regularly get news and information from content creators or influencers…

…are actively engaged in issues and events, and more positive than other Americans about their ability to keep up

• Those who regularly get news and information from content creators or influencers are more positive than others about their own ability to keep informed. About half (54%) feel positive about this ability, outpacing the 33-39% of other groups.

…like other Americans, value the role of journalism in society, while also believing non-journalists can create it

• Strong majorities of all Americans see “news organizations that employ reporters” as critical for an informed society, ranging from 73% to 85%.
• While the plurality of all four groups keep informed about issues and events somewhat closely, 32% of those who regularly get news and information from content creators or influencers say they keep up very closely. That is comparable to those who never get news or information this way (27%) and more than those who occasionally or rarely do (20-21%).

• Among those who regularly consume information and news from influencers or content creators, about three-quarters say that “people who are not journalists” as well as “everyday people” can produce journalism. Majorities of all Americans share these views, although they are slimmer majorities among those who never consume news and information this way. About two-thirds of those who regularly consume news and information this way view “journalism” and “news” as different, as do comparable numbers of all groups.
• People who regularly or occasionally get news and information from influencers or content creators are more likely to say they look for information from individuals compared with those who rarely or never do, but at least two-thirds of all groups turn first to organizations.

…prioritize speed in getting informed comparably to hearing from professional journalists; all others say hearing from professional journalists is more important

• Among six factors important to choosing how to get informed, more than one-third of those who regularly get news and information from content creators or influencers select “getting the news quickly” (48%), “being able to go more or less in-depth on a story” (42%), “getting the news from professional journalists” (41%) and “seeing news from many different sources” (39%). 
• They consider timeliness (“getting the news quickly”) and the source (“getting the news from professional journalists”) as comparably important; everyone else prioritizes the source (39-52% say it’s “very important”) over speed (25-30%). The full list of items asked about is available here.

…have more technology-driven media habits than other Americans, but do not rely solely on social media

• The more often people get news and information from content creators or influencers, the more likely they are to rate digital technology “very important” to their ability to get informed.²
• When asked which of seven different pathways people use most often for news, those who regularly get news and information from content creators or influencers are split between social media (39%) and a specific news organization (38%). The rest of Americans turn to specific organizations more often than social media.

…are more optimistic than others about developments in technology

• A majority of those who regularly get news and information from content creators or influencers think digital technology will have a positive impact on their ability to keep informed; about half or less of all other groups agree.

• When compared with other groups, they are equally or more positive about AI’s long-term impact on both their ability to keep informed about issues and events and journalists’ reporting ability. 

• Those who regularly get news and information from content creators or influencers are confident that the internet will remain an open place to share news, with 30% very confident, and an additional 43% somewhat confident. They are about twice as likely as others to be very confident. 

In Conclusion

Those who regularly get news and information online from content creators or influencers are similar to other Americans in that they value news and journalism but they do not see journalism as the exclusive province of journalists.

They are also unique in other ways. They are the only group who does not prioritize getting the news from professional journalists over getting the news quickly. They see digital technology as very important to getting informed, more than how the rest of Americans see it. They are also more positive about developments in technology, including the future of the internet and the role of AI. That might be why they are more positive about their personal ability to keep informed.

Overall, this research points to the role that individual news creators play in many people’s information habits. For the public, more traditional providers of journalism and individual providers have already begun to come together to provide a full news experience. The way information providers may or may not collaborate and complete one another on the production side remains to be seen.

As the range of relied-upon sources for news and information continues to expand, there is a great deal more to learn about the public, news producers and the broader network of digital content (including its creation, access and sharing). CNTI looks forward to continuing to study these topics and collaborate with other researchers to better understand these areas of development in society.

About This Study

Why we did this study

News organizations are showing signs of recognizing influencers and content creators as their colleagues. In the U.S. specifically, they were invited in to cover the Democratic National Convention this past summer and the new Trump administration has actively encouraged “podcasters and social media influencers” to apply for press credentials to cover the White House. Moreover, coverage of current conflicts — including those in Gaza and Ukraine — includes on-scene videos and updates shared by eye-witness content creators. Influencers are improving gaps in access to information in places where professional journalists are being targeted in the conflict or facing legal restrictions on reporting from war zones. CNTI is pleased to add to the expanding research in this area, including recent work from the Reuters Institute and Pew Research Center.

As with all CNTI research, this report was prepared by the research and professional staff of CNTI. This project was financially supported by CNTI’s funders. 

This report is part of CNTI’s broader “Defining News Initiative” which examines questions surrounding this theme in policy, technological developments and the views of journalists, in addition to public perceptions. The survey data in this report measure the public’s perceptions of news, journalism and technology in the United States. (Read our four-country survey report here.) These data were collected in parallel with a global survey of journalists. 

CNTI was motivated by several overarching questions:

1. How does the public navigate new ways of being informed?
2. Where do they see journalism fitting in?
3. How can journalism do a better job of communicating its unique value?

Answers to these questions are central for better understanding the evolving information ecosystem. As CNTI learned in a series of focus groups last year in Australia, Brazil, South Africa and the United States, people are putting a lot of work into getting themselves up to speed on news. At the same time, many are actively tuning news out, expressing a sense that it is overwhelming.

How we did this

CNTI’s survey questionnaire was developed internally by our research team and advisors in consultation with Langer Research Associates. Focus groups were initially run in Australia, Brazil, South Africa and the United States which informed the development of the questionnaire. Additional details on themes from the focus groups may be found in a series of essays available on CNTI’s website.

In partnership with Langer Research Associates, the United States survey data were collected through Ipsos:

• United States data are from Ipsos’s probability-based online KnowledgePanel® and was conducted from September 12-21, 2024. A total of 1,670 panelists were initially selected and 1,053 completed the survey. A total of 28 respondents were removed during the quality control process, yielding a final sample size of 1,025 respondents. The design effect was 1.13 and a margin of error of 3.3 points. The survey was available in English (n = 983) and Spanish (n = 42). All surveys were self-administered online, and the median interview length was 10 minutes and 23 seconds. The sample collection age categories were: 18-29, 30-44, 45-59 and 60+. 

The question, “How often, if at all, do you get news and information online from individual content creators or influencers?” was only asked of the U.S. sample.

Technical reports from the survey vendors are available upon request from info@innovating.news.

How we weighted survey data 

The data were weighted using demographic variables (i.e., age, sex, education and macroregion). While each individual country used a different age breakdown for sample collection, we opted to recode the age breakdown into the following categories: 18-29, 30-44, 45-54 and 55+. These categories were used to ensure there were at least 100 weighted respondents in each group.

For specific questions about the sample frames, weighting procedures and/or additional survey details, please send an email to the research team at info@innovating.news. 

How we protected our data

Data was collected by the vendor. The survey included individual-level information such as age, gender, race, political ideology and macro-region. Survey data supplied to CNTI from the vendor did not include names or specific locations of respondents. Instead, each respondent received an unique identifier.

It would be very difficult, if possible at all, to identify survey respondents because CNTI did not collect personal contact information or contact respondents directly. The survey data for this project are securely stored in an encrypted folder that is only authorized to the core research team at CNTI.

How we analyzed the data

Data were analyzed using the R statistical computing language. In addition to base R functions, several packages (libraries) were used to clean and analyze the data. These included: googledrive, pewmethods, pollster, survey and tidyverse. We recoded missing, refused and don’t know responses into a catch-all category to keep the sample sizes for each country consistent across each question that did not explicitly have survey logic (i.e., questions that were asked to every respondent).

Data were analyzed using the demographic sample weights supplied by Ipsos and Langer Research Associates. These weights were applied to every analysis and crosstabs in this report. Non-statistical analyses consisted of toplines and crosstabs. Statistical analyses found in this report consisted of Chi-square proportion tests (see the “How we tested for statistical significance” section below). 

Exploratory analyses were run to learn about the data and responses. These methods consisted of both linear (ordinary least squares) and non-linear regression (logistic regression, ordered logistic regression). 

How we addressed data quality

Data quality in the open-ended responses received attention during the analysis phase of the project. CNTI worked with Langer Research Associates and country vendors to review what interviewers recorded from respondents’ open ends. Several anomalies and mistakes were found and addressed where possible.

How we tested for statistical significance

We analyzed the results using Chi-squared proportion tests to assess differences in responses between groups. We used a standard threshold of p < 0.05 for assessing statistical significance. Differences mentioned in the report text are statistically significant.

Additional notes on methods

1. Responses to the question PSAIHELP1 and PSJHELP2 in the online U.S. survey were updated after recontacting individuals who responded “Don’t know.” Responses for recontacted individuals were added back into the survey as a new question and added to the answers from those who did not reply “Don’t know.”
2. The crosstab data for PSAIHELP1 and PSJHELP2 reflect all “Don’t know” responses being grouped into the “DK/Refused/Missing” catch-all category.

Crosstabs

---

Footnotes

1. The question, “How often, if at all, do you get news and information online from individual content creators or influencers?” was only asked if the respondent was based in the U.S. ↩︎
2. Those who occasionally or rarely consume news and information this way are not significantly different but all other pairwise comparisons are different. ↩︎