Introduction

Journalism continues to play a central role in disseminating information, but new and familiar challenges continue to reinvent how that role is viewed, used, and defined. The internet has made it equally easy to consume and create information, which has decentralized the power of storytelling. As newsrooms continue to shrink, news deserts spread, and user-generated content grows, local news organizations are looking to maximize their expertise and resources in ways that connect with audiences. One important area for local journalism to thrive is in reporting consistently credible, reliable information about their communities to help counter the impact of misinformation. 

This belief in the power of local journalism is the cornerstone of the Voices Listening Project (VLP). The project, a collaboration between Wick Communications and the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University (ASU), was shaped by a careful analysis of the media diets and local news perceptions of communities in Arizona. The ultimate goal of the project was to apply the information gathered through a series of surveys and in-depth interviews to developing and testing tools to improve local journalism and combat misinformation. This effort was funded primarily by the Google News Initiative through its 2021 North America Innovation Challenge program.  

About the Voices Listening Project

An important and unique aspect of VLP is the opportunity to engage ASU students who come from different degrees, interests, and levels to collaborate on community initiatives. The VLP team was made up of four undergraduate students, four graduate student research assistants, and two graduate students studying user experience. Additionally, two project managers from Wick and two Cronkite faculty members rounded out the team, overseeing the project and providing training and guidance for the students. The project involved frequent brainstorming, research and product iterations, synthesis of interviews and findings, and community visits. Our work on product research and development benefited from our students’ varied fields, from journalism to public relations to sustainability.

With these joint efforts, the VLP developed a core mission to explore and innovate public trust in media by answering these questions:

“How do people interact with misinformation?”

“How can local journalism combat misinformation in communities?” 

“How can local journalism engage audiences to increase trust?”

Related Research

It is well understood that news consumption contributes to higher civic involvement and engagement. Media is a way for citizens to hold their leaders accountable and empower individuals and communities that otherwise would not have a platform to present their realities, develop analytical frameworks which they can use to interpret the world around them, and foster a greater sense of belonging.

It is trust in media that connects journalists with their audiences. It can also predict an industry’s capacity to sustain itself among the public and in the business.

For local or community-centered journalism, audiences appreciate constructive coverage of their community and more accurate and respectful representations. Factors that have affected trust in local journalism are “affective and relational,” such as the kind of stories produced about the neighborhood and lack of coverage of issues relevant to the community.

When there is lack of diverse media representation and local coverage, it prompts communities to create their own spaces for information sharing where their local realities are reflected and highlighted. Without the rigors of editorial practices, like verification, these spaces are threatened by misinformation.

Process/Methods

Phase one

In spring 2022, the team focused their efforts in three Arizona communities: Safford, Tucson, and Maryvale. These communities were chosen based on several reasons: 

• Safford was chosen because Wick Communications has a newspaper there, the Eastern Arizona Courier. It is also a small town outside of the normal coverage areas of large city papers.

• Maryvale was chosen for its connections to ASU. It is a diverse pocket of the Phoenix metro area. 

• Tucson was chosen because it is a smaller city than Phoenix with diverse communities and perspectives living there. 

First, students conducted initial interviews with stakeholders in all three communities. These background interviews included prominent leaders in the community, such as nonprofit organizers, political representatives, superintendents, and religious leaders. Through these conversations, students received insight into how the community was organized, the beginnings of the problems the community faced, and a foundation off of which to base further questions. 

Then, the team surveyed 413 residents in the three target communities. The goal of the survey was to learn more about Arizona residents’ information habits, their thoughts about local news in their communities, the role of misinformation in the media diets of people in these communities, and potential ways to combat it. We also investigated how people connect with their communities online. 

Finally, students conducted 44 in-depth, online interviews with survey respondents. Empathy interviews were used as an after-survey tool to gain in-depth understanding of respondents' perceptions and knowledge of local journalism. In the roughly one-hour interview, our questions focused on uncovering more about interviewees’ media habits and views on content moderation, misinformation, and verification. Empathy interviews were used as a qualitative tool to substantiate and give greater depth to our survey results. In some cases, it affirmed a pattern we observed in the surveys, primarily on perceptions of what misinformation means, media trustworthiness, and social media trustworthiness.

Phase two

In summer and fall 2022, the VLP team focused their efforts on generating more quantitative data by administering a statewide version of the survey, conducting empathy interviews with Spanish-speaking residents and, finally, prototype testing and usability interviews.

The combination of targeted and broad research efforts allowed us to identify relevant distinctions between our three identified communities and Arizona as a whole. These efforts affirmed a broad pattern for the following areas:

• Media skepticism: respondents consistently reported their belief that outlets only tell one side or version of a story, thus audiences are less likely to trust what they consume.

• Loss of relevant coverage: respondents agreed there are not enough local news outlets covering community stories, and that current local news outlets are unable to consistently give timely information or focus too much on one kind of news (e.g. university news).

Our Spanish surveys and interviews also uncovered contrasts when it comes to language. Spanish-speaking respondents reported on language barriers as an access issue. English media has more resources. Although it does not provide relevant community coverage all the time, it has more timely information which makes some community members opt for English media over others (e.g. Spanish media)

Results from Community Surveys and Empathy Interviews

Overall, survey results showed that target communities seek local journalism that goes beyond crime reporting. They look for news about local events and journalism that is more solutions-oriented. 

Respondents across all surveys cited a concern about choice in sources used in news stories. We found in our interviews that respondents view lack of diversity in sources to be indicative of biased or partisan reporting. This, in turn, can be perceived as misinformation. Other factors that tie well with this result include a discussion during an in-depth interview about the reporting process of a news story and background information about the reporter. When it comes to misinformation, respondents perceive it to be a problem in any platform, with some understanding that misinformation is biased or partisan reporting.

Key themes from the community surveys focused on trust (or lack of trust) and relevance of local news. None of the community respondents had a platform that they trust all the time for local news. At best, they would sometimes trust what they get from newspaper/magazine, radio, word of mouth, and public events. In the same vein, all communities perceive a misinformation problem in all kinds of sources, from traditional media to social media. It should be noted that misinformation is sometimes perceived as biased or partisan reporting.

Respondents expressed a need for local journalism that is relevant to the community. The issue was not only that there was a lack of coverage, but that even if there was coverage or a local news outlet, it did not produce stories that were important to the respondents. Respondents indicated that they typically find local news that focus on crime coverage, and that they seek coverage that goes more on solutions.

• Top 50 most mentioned words for survey question “What challenges do you have when getting information about your community?”

The empathy interviews we conducted revealed additional insights into people’s news habits and perceptions. One overarching theme is that people want to be in charge of what they consume. This was often presented as “doing their own research,” a long-time concept in the media and information literacy research that encourages people to use verification techniques to deconstruct media messages that has recently taken on new meaning in fringe and conspiracy groups. We took this feedback as an opportunity to inform product designs that provide additional context and background about topics, reporters, and sources. 

As in the surveys, the empathy interviews revealed that there is not enough local coverage in our test communities. Interviewees were looking for more credible places to find information about local events and happenings, and stories that highlight successes and solutions to important issues. And though it was mostly thought of as divisive, most respondents got at least some of their local news from social media, a contradiction of sorts that also provided product opportunities.    

Statewide results show a significant concern for business models of journalism, such as ads and paywalls, which is not as much of a concern for our community respondents. Consistent with our targeted surveys, the statewide results also view misinformation to be a problem in any platform, and some see misinformation as biased or partisan reporting.

Statewide Survey Results 

Following the initial community surveys and empathy interviews, we conducted a statewide survey of 1,076 Arizona residents to learn more about levels of community involvement, their media and digital technology habits, and perceptions of local news across the state. This survey sample was also for follow-up interviews to discuss product prototypes. The sample population was normally distributed by age, with 72% identifying as white and 27.6% identifying as Hispanic or Latino. Those holding an associate’s degree or higher comprised 39.2% of the sample, with 23.5% identifying as high school graduates, and 24.1% indicating they had some college. Gender was evenly split between male and female, with 9.3% identifying as other. 

In most cases, results from the statewide survey supported what we learned in our initial three communities. Increasing our sample size offers the additional insight to confirm that the challenges local journalism faces are pervasive across Arizona. 

Importance and Relevance of Local News 

Respondents agreed that it is important to be informed about their community (73.3%) and that local journalism is important to the community (58.7%), but the level of involvement in neighborhood projects or groups was more evenly distributed, with 22.8% reporting they are involved or very involved. When asked what drives them to connect with their local community, 71.5% of respondents said it was to know more about local happenings. About a third of the sample indicated they were aware or very aware of local policies and projects (31.9%). 

Eighty percent of respondents said they look for news about their community at least some of the time, with 20.2% reporting they look all the time. Respondents were generally satisfied with the quality of their local news, with 48.4% saying there is a variety of stories. However, 18.8% said they “hardly find any news about my community.”

Relevance, representation, and diversity of viewpoints mattered most to respondents when it comes to could maintain or improve trust in local news. Efforts to increase transparency and engagement, including creating more ways to provide feedback and knowing the reporters covering the community, were less popular suggestions. It’s worth noting that 35% of respondents said that not having to pay for the news would help maintain or improve trust while only 8.2% said that paying for news would help, opinions that underscore the conundrum of sustainable business models for local news. The most common among the write-in responses for the 1.8% who chose “other” related to reporting verifiable facts or “truth” using credible sources.  

Survey responses support ideas that have been growing in popularity within the journalism industry — and have been put into practice at Wick Communications through the Voices 

Listening Project, NABUR and other initiatives — namely, that local news content should be reflective of the community it serves. 

Zooming in closer, survey and qualitative interview responses indicate that people want to see news coverage that is useful to the community, including stories that propose solutions to local problems (62.7%) and highlights local news and events (58.7%). Coverage of crime, violence, accidents, and justice was named as the type of coverage most commonly found about respondents’ communities (75.8%), but it was also identified as one of the top three types of stories respondents want to see (55.1%). Stories about local politics, policies and government were the second most commonly found local stories (59.5%) but were less popular when it comes to desired community coverage (46.7%).

Technology, Community, and News

Technology use was high among respondents, with 85.9% stating they used technology at least sometimes to connect with people in their community. More than 85% of respondents said they felt natural or very natural using technology; social media was the most popular way people interacted with others in their community (71.6% said social media was one way they interacted with their community). The majority of respondents have used mobile apps, radio or podcasts, websites, video/television, and email to access local news.

The only source of local information that was deemed more untrustworthy than trustworthy was word of mouth, though most sources were about even in terms of perceived trustworthiness (include chart). It’s worth noting that 37.5% percent of respondents indicate they don’t get information from newspapers or magazines (though it wasn’t specified, the assumption is that the question was asking about print sources). 

Impact of Misinformation

Several questions in the survey aimed to learn more about respondents’ media literacy habits and perceptions of misinformation.

Overall, participants agreed there is a lot of misinformation on TV, radio, newspapers, and magazines (72.2%), news websites, online radio, and news streaming sites (70.5%), and social media (78.3%). In an open-ended question about what could improve information quality on online news sites xxx. Participants were also asked how information quality could be improved on social media xxx.

A majority of respondents said they double-check information online before they share it more than some of the time (62.4%), though 14.1% said they rarely or somewhat rarely double-checked information before sharing.

Key Themes from Open-Ended Responses

Several open-ended survey questions provided additional context related to journalism trust and value. Respondents at times conflated bias and partisan opinions as misinformation, suggesting that the presence of bias led to a decrease in trust. This was often coupled with respondents’ belief that there is often a lack of transparency in sharing opinions and citing credible sources, which also contributes to a decline in trust. A related discussion involved the cost of news and its perceived value. Few respondents indicated a desire to pay for news as a form of quality control; however the presence of too much advertising was viewed by some as a cheapening of the quality of information. This tension is at the core of issues of journalism sustainability. 

• Top 50 most mentioned words for survey question “What do you think would improve the information quality on news sites?”:

Product Development and Testing 

Based on our survey and interview findings, the VLP team shifted focus to product design. User pain points were identified by the team, then distilled into problem statements. These served as prompts for our product brainstorming. 

The first problem chosen was: “People trust themselves to determine what’s true and false online based on gut feelings.”

Through our interviews, we found that participants decided what information to trust based on trust in their own intuition. When asked to expand, participants generally couldn’t point to a specific process or signals that led to those decisions.

”I take everything with a grain of salt,” one Tucson resident said. “I am just very careful with things I find online,” one Safford resident said.  

For the next problem, the team chose: “People doubt the credibility of the sources news organizations cite in their journalism, and have low trust in the information they see online from those organizations.”

Through this ideation, the research team narrowed in on three product categories: 

-Tools for users, like browser extensions, to improve media literacy 

-Tools for journalists to build increased transparency and trust in their work

-Existing solutions from other companies that presented a third-party perspective on the publication or information

Researchers started by sketching low-fidelity wireframes, which were presented to the team for voting. Two ASU graduate students majoring in user experience were hired to build high-fidelity prototypes of the winning ideas. 

The designs were packaged into a product feasibility study and sent out to our statewide survey respondents for review. The test design asked respondents to rate each product based on how likely it would be to improve their online browsing experience. They were also given the opportunity to provide short-answer feedback. 

Researchers then conducted feasibility interviews with seven of these community members to gain greater insight into the products’ usability. 

The structure of the interviews included the following user questions to gauge baseline understanding of the user’s news consumption history: 

1. What news outlets do you most-often turn to to get news about your community?

2. Do you pay attention to the sources used in news you consume?

3. If so, what do you look for in a source? 

4. In your own words, how would you define misinformation?

5. Tell me about a time you saw misinformation. How did you identify it? 

Then, the interviewer presented each product sketch and asked the following: 

1. What are your first impressions of this product?

2. Is this something you would use if it was available to you? 

3. Have you seen something like this before? 

4. If you saw this, how would it affect your behavior? 

5. Would this increase your trust in the site/information if you had access to this? 

Responses 

Discussion 

We grounded the Voices Listening Project in existing research and projects aimed at tackling issues related to trust in local news and the impact of misinformation, including Wick’s NABUR initiative. Our goals of listening to the information needs of Arizona residents and designing journalism products to address those needs were met through a nearly yearlong research effort that yielded compelling and useful, if not altogether unsurprising, results. 

Through our mixed methods approach, we were able to dig deeper into key themes emerging from our survey results. The in-depth interviews we conducted in English and Spanish provided rich context about how people find and use information and certain barriers people face to accessing credible information about their local communities. Our three target communities value local journalism, but also seek local coverage that is relevant, diverse, and representative of their neighborhood. This puts a premium on transparency in the reporting process, and in developing tools that aid in making news more transparent so that the audience can see and evaluate the efforts to be relevant, diverse, and representative.

We found that most people are heavily reliant on digital technology and social media for finding out about local news and events. But even as use of these tools is quite high, it is complicated by the pervasive feeling that online information — especially that found on social media — is unreliable and not trustworthy. From this contradiction, it was clear that products we developed should bridge the gap between people’s media habits and their skepticism about online news. 

Survey and interview results also showed that many people conflate partisan, opinion-based information with misinformation and lament the presence of bias in the news. While the two have been known to overlap, it seems apparent from our research that much of the concern about misinformation in local news is actually related to news commentary. Whether that comes from friends, family, connections on social media or professional journalists is unclear, but in a digital media environment in which we see updates from all those places at once, it may not matter. The point is that the reputational damage has been done, and journalists must acknowledge this in order to repair the relationship.

We learned that most people double-check facts they read about online, at least some of the time. People talked of doing their own research, which underscores the importance of media literacy to help guide people to evidence-based credible sources. We concluded that one way to help guide people in doing this is to increase transparency and access to sourcing within a news article. This became one of the more popular product prototypes we tested, based on our usability testing.

In general, those who participated in usability testing responded positively to tools that add more context or background information about a news story, such as who the reporter is, why were the sources chosen, and what is the verification process. This ties strongly to a common practice of people pursuing their own research on a topic. Usability interviews affirm a trend of people needing more information to come to their own conclusions instead of having a tool to label what is or is not factual. People want to be able to exercise their own judgment and see misinformation tools as ways to supplement their ability to judge. However, these products provide some signposts to help guide people toward credible and reliable sources; in this case, journalists and news organizations can act as guides rather than simply detached presenters of facts. Ideally, this also helps prevent the pitfalls of “doing your own research,” which include leading to results that are not factual but reinforce existing beliefs or are promoted by platform algorithms.    

From the outset, we had two ultimate goals for this project: 1) Incorporate these learnings into strategy for our own organizations, and 2) share them widely for the benefit of our industry. 

At Wick Communications, impacts from this research project are being felt most acutely with our NABUR initiative. The Neighborhood Alliance for Better Understanding and Respect, for which Wick received another round of Google News Initiative funding in 2019, is a community conversations platform that allows people to discuss local news and issues in a journalist-moderated forum. 

First, The Voices Listening Project research reinforced our underlying thesis for NABUR: people generally distrust the information they see online, often rightly so, and are looking for a trusted alternative. 

It has also led to some very tactical product changes in our approach. This year we began development of a next-generation NABUR platform, spurred by the VLP research, the macro economic pressures on the journalism industry, and the multifaceted issues faced by existing social media companies. 

This generation platform will have custom tools for journalists to add context to community conversations and will natively incorporate Newsguard, a third-party service that rates news websites based on standardized trustworthiness principles. This product was tested, and very well received, in our product feasibility study.

We’re also working with our content management system provider, TownNews, to build some of the article-level features that originated in this project. First on the list is the “Reporting Process” text block, which offers readers a high-level summary of the steps the author went through to source their article. This feature builds on the existing work of several other organizations, including the Trust Project and Trusting News. 

The VLP was also an opportunity for journalism and mass communication students to learn product development skills such as empathy interviewing, product development sprints, survey creation, prototyping, and more. 

The team has turned these learnings into an open-source syllabus for 101-level research-driven product design for journalists. We’ve made this resource available to anyone to adapt and use in their classroom or newsroom. 

Finally, we’re making all of our learning available to the journalism industry through our project website, voiceslisteningproject.org. It contains this whitepaper, top-level learnings from our research, case studies on our products and the syllabus. 

Over the coming months, we plan to publish additional supplementary articles from our research and how the findings are assisting in our community-building strategies.