With a pandemic in progress, many are tuning into the news now more than ever. But that raises a serious question. Can the media be trusted?

You don’t need to wear a tinfoil hat to be suspicious of what you hear on the news. A degree of media wariness is needed to avoid manipulation. Flip through different news stations and pay attention to what is being said, how certain stories are being told, and what is being omitted. Better yet, compare your country’s news to that of another country. All of a sudden, the “truth” has become very slippery, as you will surely notice the vast difference in what is being reported around the world. So who and what are we supposed to trust? How can we forge a healthy relationship between the audience and the mainstream media?

In a comprehensive history of media distrust, faith in the media began its decline decades before the 21st century. Widespread skepticism spiked in popularity in the 1970s, as people began to question various institutions. With the seeds of media doubt already planted, major corporations, the military, education, medicine, organized religion, and the government were suddenly more sharply scrutinized as well. Nixon and Watergate highlighted one of the biggest events in raising skepticism, along with lies and misinformation surrounding the Vietnam War. Since the 1970s, journalism radically shifted to cover the “why” rather than continuing to delve into “he said/she said” reporting. Effective mainstream journalism revolves around a quest for the truth, holding all parties accountable for their actions despite status, and ensuring that elected and appointed officials are serving the public and not self-serving agendas. However, the lack of transparency in many news coverage calls to question if these values are truly being adhered to, as media mistrust remains prevalent in modern times.

Where exactly does the mistrust of modern media come from? Why is it that “fake news” has become such a widespread saying? Well, look at the man surrounding the term to better understand the vicious cycle of lies plaguing Americans. President Trump rode into office not with political qualifications, but with the promise of not being yet another scheming politician serving a personal agenda. He claimed to be a new type of political candidate who would run his campaign without lies or coverups. And, likely due to the desperation of having no political figures to trust, somehow people believed the duplicitous lies he told. Even now, despite mounds of evidence contradicting many claims Trump makes, a sizable portion of Americans still follow him. Ignoring facts in favor of blind trust is disturbing to say the least, highlighting just how warped our views have become, as well as the innate need to believe someone is honest. In a world of manipulation, uncertainty, and thickly lined pockets, are people so desperate to believe in honesty that they will ignore the truth when it is staring them in the eyes?

It’s hard to believe what we are being told when some individuals seem to be so clearly equipped with better playing cards. Surely someone must be assisting them by covering up their trails. To uncover the truth, true accountability journalism is vitally needed. Effective accountability journalism relies on more than mere investigative reporting. It involves deeper digging, extensive coverage, and rigorous fact-checking of all figures. This means that no one is off-limits when it comes to uncovering the truth, including the media industry. Effective reporting shares several key characteristics that can heighten an audience’s sense of being informed and thus raise their trust. Accountability journalism strikes a balance between stories to cover a wide range of topics with context created for multiple audiences. Curiosity is at the heart of the work, with the journalists pioneering to carve their paths rather than rely on those made by others. To earn trust, relationships are built with sources, readers, and the newsroom. It is this close-knit, hard-hitting, and diversified teamwork that spurs real audience interest, as the truth is favored over political agendas and monetary gains.

But how do we reach a state of relative media trust? Restoring media trust might have to rely on a dual approach of removing both biases and conflicts of interest. When it comes to creating media trust, the medium in which the news is viewed, the brand presenting the news, and the voice behind the presentation all make a difference. Therefore specific news brand anchors tend to deliver more reliable news to audiences than merely reading an article online. However, brand trust can become muddied by a history of opinionated presenters and journalists, a lack of transparency, inaccurate reporting patterns, sensationalism, and excessive support for selective points of view. On the other hand, trust increases with a warm and responsive approach to audience feedback, in-depth coverage, a strong brand reputation, and due to individual journalist reputations. The most important thing that news brands can do to mend media trust is to openly declare any conflicts of interest or bias regarding particular stories. Such transparency would go a long way in restoring mainstream media trust.

So can we trust what we hear and read? This question lacks a clear answer, as variables matter. Perhaps the best response is the adage take everything with a grain of salt. And don’t be afraid to do your own digging to reveal the truth concealed beneath an attractive presentation.