The crisis of trust in the media: When the messenger becomes the message
THOMAS NKHOMA | Monday October 19, 2026 06:00
Trust is an interesting currency. Unlike money, it cannot be printed, borrowed indefinitely or replenished by an institution simply reminding people of its history. It accumulates through experience, is tested by conduct and can be depleted by disappointment. A media organisation may spend decades establishing its reputation, only to discover that the public no longer grants it the authority it once took for granted. Its journalists may still produce stories but something essential has weakened: the presumption that the institution deserves to be believed.
Such is the predicament confronting traditional media in an age when almost anyone with a smartphone, an internet connection and an audience can become a distributor and interpreter of news. The emergence of newsfluencers has made this predicament more visible but it would be a mistake to treat them as its original cause. They are, in many respects, both products of the media’s trust deficit and beneficiaries of the opportunities it has created.
Newsfluencers are individuals who build audiences by distributing, interpreting and discussing news and public affairs through digital platforms. Some are experienced journalists who have found new ways of reaching audiences. Others are commentators, activists or ordinary citizens whose influence derives less from professional credentials than from their ability to command attention and cultivate personal loyalty. What makes an individual without a newsroom sometimes more persuasive than an institution with trained journalists, established editorial procedures and decades of experience?
Part of the answer lies in the difference between institutional authority and personal credibility. Traditional media has historically relied on its reputation, professional standards and brand. Newsfluencers build relationships through familiarity. They speak directly to followers, respond to comments, use everyday language and create the impression of a conversation rather than a lecture from a distant editorial office.
Consider a government announcement. A newspaper may publish a carefully verified report, complete with official responses and expert analysis. A newsfluencer may explain the same announcement in a short video, asking what it means for an unemployed graduate or a household struggling with rising costs. The newspaper may offer greater depth but the influencer makes the issue feel immediate. In the contest for attention, relevance can be mistaken for superior journalism while professional restraint can be mistaken for indifference.
Such distinction matters in Botswana where discussions about governance, public expenditure and accountability increasingly unfold across digital platforms. A claim can circulate through Facebook and WhatsApp before a newsroom establishes whether it is accurate. By the time a verified report appears, the public conversation may already have settled around competing interpretations.
The challenge is not simply that misinformation travels quickly. People increasingly assess information through relationships and identities. A claim shared by someone they trust personally may carry greater weight than a correction published by an institution they already suspect. The question becomes not only whether a story is true but whether its messenger is perceived to be on the public’s side.
Yet traditional media must resist portraying itself as an innocent victim. Its difficulties are partly self-inflicted. Perceived political bias, sensational headlines, inadequate follow-up and insufficient attention to ordinary citizens have widened the distance between some newsrooms and their audiences. An institution cannot demand trust merely because it employs journalists, just as a newsfluencer cannot claim accuracy merely because thousands follow them.
Economic pressures have further complicated matters. Traditional media organisations bear the costs of staffing newsrooms, verifying information, maintaining equipment and distributing publications. Digital creators can operate with considerably lower overheads. They can broadcast live from a public meeting, publish eyewitness footage and engage followers without the structures that sometimes slow conventional reporting. Breaking news, therefore, is no longer the exclusive preserve of established media. A bystander can publish footage before a reporter arrives. A politician can announce a decision directly to the public. A newsfluencer can interpret a controversy while a newspaper is still gathering responses. The traditional newsroom’s historical advantage of controlling the first account has diminished.
Notwithstanding, journalism has not lost its purpose. Its purpose must be more clearly understood. The first account tells us what appears to have happened. Journalism at its best establishes what happened, why it happened, who was responsible and what the consequences might be. Imagine a public institution announcing a major infrastructure project. A social media personality may question its cost and ignite public debate. A newsroom can take the investigation further by examining procurement records, consulting experts, interviewing affected communities and tracking whether the project is completed. Months later, when public excitement has faded, journalists can return to the evidence. That is how a passing controversy becomes sustained public accountability.
Traditional media must, therefore, stop competing with newsfluencers primarily on speed and volume. Its advantage should lie in depth, verification, continuity and the determination to pursue difficult questions after public attention has moved elsewhere. Investigative journalism, explanatory reporting and sustained coverage of local issues are not luxuries in the digital age; they are reasons audiences should continue valuing professional news organisations.
This requires innovation in presentation as well as reporting. Rigorous journalism need not be inaccessible or dull. Newspapers can complement investigations with short videos, podcasts, interactive graphics and live discussions. Journalists can explain how claims were verified, why certain information could not be published and what remains uncertain. Newsrooms can invite audiences to identify issues requiring investigation without allowing the loudest voices to dictate editorial priorities.
Collaboration also presents an opportunity. Credible newsfluencers can help established media reach audiences who rarely engage with conventional publications while professional journalists can contribute the research, verification and context that complex stories demand. Such partnerships must remain transparent and protect editorial independence.
Above all, media organisations must rebuild trust through conduct rather than slogans. They should correct errors prominently, scrutinise powerful institutions without fear or favour, distinguish fact from opinion and give ordinary citizens meaningful representation. Acknowledging mistakes is not an admission that journalism has failed. It demonstrates that accountability applies to the media itself.
The deeper lesson is that trust cannot be separated from relevance. People are unlikely to remain confident in institutions they regard as remote from their concerns, even when those institutions produce accurate reports. Journalism must be both rigorous and responsive, explaining the world without speaking down to the people who inhabit it.
Newsfluencers have exposed the limitations of an arrangement in which institutional reputation often carried more weight than audiences’ direct experience. Their rise should not persuade traditional media to abandon its professional foundations but to make those foundations more visible and meaningful.
Attention can be captured in seconds. Credibility must be earned repeatedly. Traditional media may have lost its monopoly on breaking news but it can still distinguish itself by helping citizens understand what happened, question those who exercise power and make informed decisions. The future belongs not necessarily to the outlet that publishes first but to the one that gives the public the strongest reasons to believe it.
*Thomas Tlhaloganyo Nkhoma is
MISA-Botswana Chairman