Examining the Decline in Media Credibility

The era when mainstream media served as the public’s primary gateway to understanding various events and issues has passed. Conventional media such as television, radio, and newspapers are no longer the preferred choice for consuming information. When a political event occurs, for instance, the public now turns first to various social media platforms, watching video clips, listening to podcasts, or following commentary from trusted influencers or figures. Mainstream media may still report on the event, but it is no longer the main reference. This change is not merely about technology or shifts in how the public consumes information. Behind this transition lies a far more fundamental problem for mainstream media: trust or credibility. The Reuters Institute, in its ‘Digital News Report 2026’, noted that in Indonesia, the level of trust in the media fell from 39 percent in 2021 to 36 percent in 2025, and plummeted to 32 percent in 2026, well below the global average of 37 percent. These figures should serve as a wake-up call for the mainstream media. Credibility is clearly a crucial aspect for the media industry. When the public begins to doubt the information provided, what is at stake is not just the news or the media company, but also the relevance of the press as a public institution and its attribution as the fourth pillar of democracy. The decline in mainstream media credibility did not happen without cause. One of the main factors is related to media ownership. The media holds an important position in a democracy. Law Number 40/1999 on the Press provides a strong foundation for the press to perform its social control function, but in practice, it is not always straightforward. A classic problem is media ownership. Some media outlets are managed by specific groups with various economic and political interests. This situation does not necessarily make all presented information biased and partial, but doubt persists. When reporting criticises the government, suspicion arises as to whether the criticism is genuine journalistic work or serves a particular political interest. Conversely, when the media is lenient towards those in power, suspicion emerges that it is a mouthpiece for the authorities. The pressure on mainstream media intensifies as its business model changes drastically following the public’s migration to digital platforms. This shift in how the public accesses information has led to the erosion of advertising revenue. To prevent a decline in income, mainstream media is ‘forced’ to chase traffic, clicks, and public engagement. Consequently, quality journalism that requires time for verification, investigation, and data checking often cannot compete with fast, emotional, and easily clickable news. Journalistic practice risks turning into what is known as churnalism, the rapid production of news by recycling press releases or social media content without independent reporting, investigation, or adequate fact-checking. Soundbites increasingly replace context as a consequence of speed being valued over depth. The media risks losing its most important function: providing context. The public may receive more news, but not necessarily more understanding. Ironically, the media is losing trust precisely when the public is experiencing a ‘flood’ of information.