Survival through ethical adaptability: the future of journalism

Thomas Landerretche
2 days ago
4 min read

This article is written by Thomas Landerretche, a WES 2026 student journalist and writer for Le Dragon Déchaîné.

The interactions between citizens, private actors, and the state are extensively perceived and analyzed by the media to find the pulse of a country’s political trajectory. The media itself plays an essential role as not only the analytical reflection of world and domestic affairs, but shapers of political circumstances. Journalism in media is often attributed as the fourth pillar of democratic standing because of its ability to hold political actors accountable in the public eye, to frame people’s analytical points of references, and to engage representation and empowerment makes it an essential organ in the functioning of public life. However, this web of interconnected relationships between actors is deeply dependent on the fine thread of trust.

Trust has become an increasingly precious commodity in journalism and harder to recognize by the day. Polarization of political rhetoric and discourse, rising digitalization, and tempting implementation of artificial intelligence in the production and distribution of journalistic material all act as increasingly relevant factors in shaping truth. At the 2026 Warwick Economic Summit (WES), these questions regarding the future of journalism in an uncertain digital future were addressed by the WES Perspectives panel consisting of Chief Political Correspondent at Sky News Jon Craig, Financial Times European Economics Commentator Martin Sandbu, and Deputy Head of the Editorial Community at The Telegraph Rachel Duffy. Furthermore, keynote speaker and CEO of the Financial Times Jon Slade gave an eye-opening presentation on the intricacies of the journalistic industry and the implications of technology and artificial intelligence on how societies consume information.

Trust, the purpose of journalism, and the challenge of increasing digitalization

A constant backdrop to the conversations surrounding journalism was its fundamental basis in trust. This bilateral relationship between the journalist who trusts that the people will be interested in the information that they choose to share and the people who trust the journalist’s integrity in providing either a factual telling of events or a fully developed and argued piece of opinion is the very foundation of the importance of media in our modern era. From this bilateral relationship, citizens may choose to apply this provided knowledge in their decision making as the sovereign of the state, the pouvoir constituant originaire. As put by Jon Slade, the job of a journalist “isn’t to tell people what to think - it’s to give them enough truth to think for themselves”.

However, journalism is more than just a means to provide information. It is a democratically essential platform that must allow resistance and accountability against oppressive institutions. As Martin Sandbu put it, “The news is what people in power don’t want you to know”. Indeed, journalism is so intrinsically entwined with politics as its framing of knowledge and discussion topics have had substantial impacts on political circumstances in many ways, either by catalyzing accountability or pushing political agendas. The latter is shown through Rupert Murdoch’s media conglomerate, an example highlighted by Martin Sandbu, that pushed US president Donald Trump’s 2016 and 2024 electoral rhetoric on immigration and queer rights on his news platforms such as Fox News, contributing to both his election successes. Thus, to seem increasingly truthful and reliable in an era in which exponential misinformation has replaced coherent journalistic narratives, journalists have had to adapt their practices.

But how do newspapers and journalists sustain their practice? Indeed, journalism’s business model may be suffering from the tragedy of the commons as the craft is a costly public good that is consumed by most individuals without much financing. Then, how do journalist bodies financially continue, especially in an era in which newspaper circulation, the traditional revenue source, has decreased¹? Rachel Duffy argued that news has increasingly become the balance between bringing the truth to the public and attracting clicks and views.

Jon Slade also speaks of “building a market to truth”, especially in an era of increasing digitalization and output of artificial intelligence generated misinformation. Jon Craig calls that, for journalism, “the biggest change is, of course, technology”. As artificial intelligence has shattered people’s sense of shared truth, the very foundation of journalism is threatened. Martin Sandbu argued that the de facto suspicion by journalists regarding its applicability, the clear editorial guidelines, and the journalistic office culture makes it so that they are especially careful when using AI. Moreover, he argued that AI may be useful in processing large sets of data or files.

Overall, however, the analysis of journalism’s bilateral social relationship to the people as a “market” whose supply is the journalist’s output and demand is the people's desire for self-confirming news is slightly alienated and forgetful of human connection. It loses itself in large economic terms that feel underappreciative of empathetic societal desire for understanding and connection.

When discussing large socio-political movements, it is easy to perceive people as statistics. Journalism is a medium that is meant to share the experiences of people and the environment that surrounds them, whether it be social institutions like governments or nature itself. By thinking about journalism as a “market”, whilst rational to finding financial sustainability, we as a collective society may start to alienate ourselves from each other and lose empathy. Once that gap between people’s empathy and the stories told by journalists further polarizes, that is when we, as a society, lose both our shared perception of truth and ability to care.

The views and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the Warwick Economics Summit.

Reference List