Journalism’s True North: The Audience

A Great Lakes study of nearly 5,000 residents reveals that the crisis in local news isn’t access — it’s relevance.

It’s been more than a decade since Tracie Powell — now founder and CEO of The Pivot Fund — emailed me with a simple question: Would I partner with her on a study examining how digital disruption had created new pathways for media entrepreneurs serving underserved audiences?

I shrugged and said yes.

The premise was straightforward. The same technological disruption that sent legacy media into a death spiral had also lowered barriers to entry. It made it possible for individuals to cover issues they cared about and distribute information quickly and directly to the communities they knew best. Back then, Tracie called these entrepreneurs “New Jacks” — digital natives building media ventures outside traditional institutions.

Sure enough, we found what felt like a renaissance underway, particularly in ethnic media. Outlets like Very Smart Brothas and others were cultivating loyal audiences and shaping civic conversations. We framed that research through a journalism lens, examining these ventures as emerging players in the industry.

Our latest work — an examination of the news ecosystems in four Great Lakes states: Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Illinois — shattered that frame.

Underwritten by the Joyce, McKnight and MacArthur foundations, the Great Lakes study pushed us beyond questions about journalists and business models. It reminded me that journalism isn’t fundamentally about the people producing it or the companies built around it. It’s about the people consuming it.

Somewhere along the way, we lost sight of that.

Indigenous community members and Pivot Fund researchers seated around a table in a Native community room discussing their views. — The Pivot Fund leads a listening session with the Indigenous community at Little Earth in Minneapolis. Photo by Sean Lim

In recent years, as outlets have struggled to stay afloat and journalists have struggled to stay employed, the conversation has centered on saving institutions. Philanthropy has invested millions in efforts to stabilize the industry. The results, however, have been mixed at best. In 2025, many were stunned when the Houston Landing shut down after spending $20 million in two years. The National Trust for Local News ultimately sold the Colorado papers it once sought to preserve.

These efforts focused on sustaining platforms. But as we traveled around Lake Michigan and spoke with nearly 5,000 residents, a different reality emerged.

Contrary to popular narratives about “news deserts,” we did not meet people who couldn’t find news. We met people who had stopped relying on journalists to provide it.

They turn to Google. They scroll social media. They subscribe to newsletters and listen to podcasts. They see something posted on Reddit, Facebook, or TikTok, hear something on YouTube, and then search for more information. Discovery now happens on platforms journalists once dismissed as peripheral.

People have not abandoned information. They have abandoned institutions that failed to meet them where they are.

They are finding media entrepreneurs on social platforms. They are following creators who deliver hyperlocal updates, livestream community meetings and translate policy debates into everyday language. These entrepreneurs may not call themselves journalists, but they are filling critical information gaps.

Sierra Clark Interviewing Indigenous International Board Certified Lactation Consultant Elizabeth Montez Giras. — Sierra Clark Interviewing Indigenous International Board Certified Lactation Consultant Elizabeth Montez Giras for
a story for New York and Michigan Solutions “Indigenous Communities Revive Cultural Practices to Save Mothers’
Lives.” Photo by Philip Hutchinson, Northern Territory Imaging and Design.

Within journalism circles, watchdog and solutions reporting are often touted as the path forward. Both are essential to a healthy democracy. But the people we spoke with were asking for something even more fundamental. They wanted to know what happened at the city council meeting. They wanted clear explanations of property tax increases. They wanted updates on school board decisions and road repairs.

Just as important, they wanted information that was directly relevant to their lives and reflective of their communities. They were not interested in paying for a bundle of content that felt distant from their daily concerns. If local news is to earn financial support, it must first demonstrate local value.

In short, they wanted consistent, reliable hyperlocal news.

Yes, many expressed frustration about bias in traditional outlets. But they also acknowledged the bias embedded in the Facebook posts and influencers they now rely on. They know there’s bias, and they are turning to multiple sources of information to help balance things out.

Two people interview a woman sitting in a chair — Public Media Network youth production. Photo by Public Media Network

Their shift from traditional news outlets is not being driven solely by ideology. It is being driven by access, relevance, and convenience.

For more than a century, legacy media held a near monopoly on information — determining what issues were covered, how they were framed and when they were published or broadcast. That gatekeeping power has eroded. Audiences now decide what rises, what spreads and what matters in their daily lives.

The lesson from the Great Lakes is not that journalism is doomed. It is that journalism must reorient itself — away from platform preservation and toward audience needs. The future will not be secured by rebuilding the past. It will be shaped by those who understand that journalism’s true north is, and always has been, the public.

Read more about what we learned — and what it means for the future of community-led news — in our Michigan and Minnesota reports, and stay tuned for our upcoming Wisconsin and Illinois releases.