A comprehensive new study by Blanquerna Roman Llull university shows significant challenges in defining media outlets and regulating emerging digital news formats in an era of declining public trust and changing information consumption habits.
Key findings on media definitions
The study, based on responses from approximately 50 representatives of press councils, found that the majority of councils provide some form of media outlet definition, though approaches vary significantly:
- Quebec defines media as "any entity that publishes or broadcasts journalistic material, regardless of medium used";
- Iceland, Netherlands, and UK consider outlets as media if they are "run by professionals, broadcast regularly, and reach significant numbers of people";
- Germany, Finland, Austria, and North Macedonia deliberately avoid official definitions to maintain open self-regulation systems.
Public trust and generational divides
A complementary survey conducted in Spain, Italy, and Slovakia revealed striking generational differences in media regulation preferences:
- 43.4% of citizens favor an independent institution of journalists and academics maintaining a media register
- 32.3% support government-maintained registers based on professional ethics
- 17.1% prefer no authority between citizens and information flow
The study found that older citizens tend to support completely free media markets, while people aged 18-29 favor greater government control over media. Younger age groups also show higher rates of deliberately avoiding news exposure.
The YouTuber phenomenon
The research highlighted a significant paradox in the digital media landscape: while press councils debate whether to include YouTubers in the journalistic sphere, these content creators already perform communicative functions with undeniable social impact. Some YouTubers achieve trust levels comparable to traditional media, especially among young audiences.
However, the study warns of risks associated with channels aligned with "far-right, anti-feminist, or anti-fundamental rights discourses," connecting to concerns about lack of ethical guarantees and proliferation of clickbait and sensationalism.
Hyperpartisan media challenges
The analysis revealed that hyperpartisan and pseudo-media generate polarised trust levels, maintaining smaller but highly trusting audiences compared to traditional media. Press councils expressed discomfort with terms like "pseudo-media," with Finland's Press Council noting risks of indiscriminate labeling that may strengthen polarization.
Recommendations
The study concludes with four key recommendations for press councils:
- Incorporate functional criteria to recognize new informational actors
- Establish mechanisms for inclusion and ethical supervision of digital formats
- Explicitly integrate gender and human rights perspectives
- Provide measures against covert disinformation practices
About the study
This report is based on a mixed methodological approach combining institutional and public perspectives on media trust and self-regulation. First, an open questionnaire was distributed via email to 56 individuals affiliated with press councils across the European Union and neighboring countries. The responses gathered are analyzed in the "Press Councils Study" section, offering insights into the views, practices, and challenges of media self-regulatory bodies. Secondly, the report draws on data from a representative survey (N=1,000) conducted in Spain, which examines public attitudes toward trust in news, media consumption habits, and perceptions of press self-regulation. While the broader research project also included data from Italy and Slovakia, this report focuses primarily on the Spanish case, with occasional comparative references to the other two countries for context.
