Expert opinion by Yasmina Madafi, co-founder of La Nouvelle Agence
March 2020 marked an unprecedented upheaval: lockdowns, health restrictions and, above all, an overwhelming abundance of information broadcast around the clock. Faced with an unprecedented emergency, traditional media became essential sources of information. But as the crisis unfolded, conflicting expert opinions, the political management of communication and the rapid spread of misinformation began to challenge public trust.
Five years on, this period has clearly left its mark on the relationship between French audiences and the media. The health crisis exposed and, in some cases, intensified mistrust of official sources, accelerated the rise of alternative news channels and widened the divide between those who continue to rely on traditional media and those who increasingly look elsewhere for information.
Information overload: a factor fuelling mistrust
Throughout the pandemic, audiences were confronted with an unprecedented volume of information, often evolving from one day to the next. Scientific knowledge was developing in real time, government guidance changed as the situation evolved, and experts did not always agree. For the public, distinguishing established facts from emerging hypotheses became increasingly difficult.
The media found themselves caught between two competing expectations: an audience seeking clear guidance and reassurance, and growing criticism that coverage was excessive or overly dramatic. For some, this information overload contributed to a gradual rejection of certain traditional news sources in favour of alternative platforms where debates appeared more open, but where audiences were also more exposed to rumours and misinformation.
YouTube, X — then still known as Twitter — and Telegram all gained prominence as sources of news and commentary during the crisis, attracting audiences looking for a wider range of viewpoints. Experts and commentators who received little exposure in mainstream media found new ways to make their voices heard, sometimes contributing to the circulation of highly contested claims.
This diversification of sources has profoundly changed the media landscape. News consumption in France is increasingly fragmented: while many people continue to rely on traditional media, others now turn to independent commentators, social platforms and online communities.
Communication under pressure for businesses and institutions
For communications professionals and press relations agencies, this shift represents a major challenge. How do you address an audience whose trust in the media has become increasingly fragmented? How can organisations ensure that official statements are seen as credible information rather than corporate or institutional messaging?
Communication strategies must now take this scepticism into account. This means greater transparency, stronger engagement with audiences and more effective management of criticism and contradiction. Companies and institutions need to understand that what they say will be scrutinised, analysed and, at times, challenged.
Working with credible media outlets remains essential, but it is no longer sufficient on its own. Organisations also need to understand and engage with the new channels through which opinions are formed, information is shared and trust is built.
What does the future hold for news?
Five years on from the first lockdown, the media landscape is more fragmented than ever. Rebuilding trust in institutional news sources will take time. Part of the answer may lie in more transparent journalism, more open communication and more consistent dialogue between news organisations and their audiences.
For media and press relations professionals, the challenge is therefore no longer simply to disseminate a message. It is about creating the conditions in which that message can be heard, understood and trusted.
This is a considerable challenge, but an essential one in a world where information — and the question of whom we choose to trust — sits increasingly at the heart of public debate.
