People often lament that, while local news often represents the best of what news can and should be, it seems to have suffered more than any other part of the industry in recent years. They look to the USA, where researchers have identified more than 3,000 local newspaper closures since 2005 – a trend that shows no signs of slowing down (Metzger 2024).
But one reason the decline in the USA is so large is that local media used to occupy a position of unusual size and strength. In some regions, such as parts of Asia, local news media have never enjoyed this status, and in others, such as in the Nordic countries, some local publishers like Amedia have weathered the storm of digital transition, and now operate successful businesses based in part on digital reader revenue.
While the same broad trends in news use – such as the growth of online news use and the rise of digital platforms – are evident almost everywhere, they are unfolding at different rates, creating large national variation. It is therefore worth continually examining the position of local news media in today’s information ecosystem – and crucially, to what extent its trajectory maps on to what is happening at the national level, and how all this varies by country.
Local news media used to have a de facto monopoly over the provision of certain types of local information, but people now have a range of different sources to choose from – including digital platforms. It is therefore important for local publishers to understand the information needs of audiences, and whether they will turn to news media to fulfil them.
To better understand this, we asked a series of questions about local news in this year’s survey. The first of these simply asked people what kinds of local information people have accessed in the last week. Although it was not possible to ask about every type of local information people might have used, we focused on broad categories that covered the types that we thought would be the most widely sought after.
Our podcast on the findings
Spotify | Apple Podcasts | Transcript
What types of local news and information do people access?
On average, across the 45 markets where we fielded this question1, we see that people most frequently accessed information about general local news stories (e.g. about crimes, accidents) (49%), local activities/culture (e.g. things to do, reviews, walks, talks) (38%), and local information services (e.g. train/bus times, weather, movie times) (37%). Just one-third (32%) said they accessed information about local politics/government in the last week, despite this often being held up as the most important function of local news media. Information about local sports and clubs (20%), things to buy/sell locally (including services, e.g. plumbers, electricians) (26%), and local notices (e.g. births, deaths, marriages) (19%) were accessed by between one-fifth and one-quarter. Although none of these individual types of local information were accessed by more than half on average, 81% said that they had accessed at least one of these. Though, of course, this still means that around 20% do not access any news information about their local area on a regular basis.
Unsurprisingly, accessing local news and information is more widespread in some countries than in others. In Finland and Sweden, for example, 88% and 87% respectively accessed at least one of the information types listed earlier, but in Belgium the figure is just 73%, and lower still in Japan at 68%. These country differences are also reflected in the figures for each individual information type. For example, on average across markets, the proportion that accessed local news stories (e.g. about crimes, accidents) in the last week was 49%, but this rises to 68% in Finland and 69% in Sweden, but just 46% in Japan and 41% in Belgium.
These differences can be partly explained by interest in local news. If we plot national levels of interest in local news (against interest in news generally) we see that interest varies a lot by market, ranging from 60% (‘very’ or ‘extremely’ interested) in South Africa and 55% in Finland, down to just 21% in Taiwan and 20% in South Korea. It is also worth noting that interest in local news is correlated with interest in news in general – which suggests that people interested in one tend to be interested in the other. We can also see that most datapoints appear below the line of equality, indicating that interest in local news is typically lower than interest in news in general. This means that in some cases local news access may be more influenced by changes to unintentional news consumption habits, as personal motivation is less important.
Although the overall extent of local news and information access varies by country, the relative popularity of each information type is fairly consistent. In other words, when we take the rank order of the information types in individual countries, and compare this to the rank order on average, we do not see large differences. Germany, Ireland, and Austria are among those countries with the biggest rank order difference. This is partly because people are more likely to access local notices here, suggesting that information about births, deaths, and marriages is more important in some markets – but even so we see that the same basic pattern closely resembles the average. Local news access is less common in Slovakia and Morocco, but even here we do not see radically different patterns of local information access. People, then, seem to have similar types of local information needs across countries – even if there is some variation in how widespread those needs are.
What sources do people think are best for local news and information?
Although most people still access news and information about their local area on a weekly basis, local publishers are no longer the only source for people to choose from. According to our data, many people rely on search engines and social media platforms for local information – and in some cases, they are now seen as the best sources for that information.
In our survey, those that said they had accessed each type of information in the last week were asked a follow-up question: ‘Which source, if any, offers the best information for you on this topic?’ Respondents could select from a range of different sources, including different types of local news media (local newspaper, radio, or television), different platforms (search engines or social media), a specialised app or website, or people they know personally.
People’s preferences for different sources of local news and information vary by country and by topic. For example, local TV (in the USA) and local newspapers (in Germany and the UK) are still seen as the best source of information about local politics among those that consume it. However, if we look instead at local activities and culture, we see that consumers in the US and the UK now see social media as the best source – though local newspapers are still preferred in Germany.
This highlights how platforms have now come to be seen as the best source for certain types of local information in some parts of the world. If we average across all markets and look at the net difference between the proportion that think news media (local television, newspapers, and radio) are the best source and the proportion who instead say platforms (social media and search engines) we see that local news media is seen as better for local politics (+16), news (+13) and notices (+10). However, platforms tend to be seen as a better source for local activities and culture (-6), local services (-11), and local buying and selling (-23) – all of which used to be dominated by local news media.
In general, platforms are now seen as the best sources of what we might think of as more commoditised information. While coverage of newsworthy events and local politics can vary in quality and depth, it’s harder to see how you can have better quality or more in-depth information about a road closure or a diverted bus route. In that sense, any difference in quality primarily exists in how it is delivered and presented, and how convenient it is to access – something that platforms excel at.
It is important to understand, however, that this pattern varies enormously by market. In some countries, such as Norway, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, and the Netherlands, local news media are still seen as the best sources of most types of local information, with the occasional exception of local services and local buying and selling (in Sweden, for example).
Other countries – the UK being a good example – tend to show this same split between a preference for news media when it comes to local news and politics, but a preference for search and social platforms for information about local activities, services, and buying and selling. At the same time, there are also examples of countries – like the Czech Republic – where there is no clear preference for either platforms or the news media for most types of local information.
There are some markets in the data where platforms are seen as the best source for all of the types of local news and information that we asked about in the survey – including information about local politics and government. Examples of these markets include Morocco, Malaysia, Indonesia, Taiwan, and Thailand. Although some people in these markets do think local newspapers, radio, and television are the best source of information for specific topics, in each case the proportion that say either search engines or social media are better is considerably larger. However, as in any analysis of the role of platforms in the information ecosystem, it must be acknowledged that in many cases the information served up by platforms comes from the news media, and in that sense platforms are both a gateway to the news media and a source of information in their own right.
Why are some markets more dependent on platforms?
Understanding exactly how and why each market has taken a particular path is a complex task. In general, the emergence of these quite distinct patterns has probably been shaped by the historic strength of the news media in different markets, and how resilient they have been in the face of digital disruption. At the same time, countries have, for example, different levels of state support for local media, different technological infrastructure, and are home to individuals and organisations that have different responses to change – all of which can combine to produce a near infinite number of different outcomes.
One thing that is clear, though, is that the shifts in preferences we see at the local level are part of broader shifts we have seen for news overall. Researchers in platform studies use the term ‘platformisation’ to refer to the extent to which platforms – search engines, social networks, video networks, messaging apps, and more recently, generative AI – have become central to media environments, and the consequences this has for cultural production and consumption. When it comes to news, our previous research has shown that, although almost all internet users use platforms, there are large country differences in the proportion that use them to access news specifically (Nielsen and Fletcher 2023).
If we plot people’s preference for search and social platforms for local information (measured as the average difference between the proportion who prefer news media for local and platforms across each information type) against the proportion who say that either search or social is their main way of getting news online, we see a clear correlation. In countries where people prefer to use search and social for news online, and thus platformisation is high (e.g. Thailand), people tend to say platforms are the best source of local information. Conversely, in countries where platformisation is low and people still prefer to go directly to publisher’s websites and apps (e.g. Finland), people are more likely to say that the news media are the best source for local information.
Given that previous research suggests that news platformisation is stronger in markets where the newspaper industry was historically weaker (Nielsen and Fletcher 2023), it seems likely that the preference for platforms for local information is also strongest in countries where there was only a weak newspaper industry to begin with. In this sense, we are seeing a kind of path dependency in how patterns of local news and information access are changing.
What does this mean for publishers?
One overarching takeaway is that the trends we see shaping news consumption more broadly often also affect local news in similar ways. Sometimes the effect at the local level might be more pronounced, sometimes less so, but the direction of the effect is usually the same. Local news is not special in that sense.
But given that these big trends are clearly playing out differently in different countries, the response from local publishers should also depend on the nature of the market they find themselves in. Local publishers in countries where platforms are the preferred source for local information of all types will likely benefit from a strategy that recognises the centrality of platforms to the information ecosystem more broadly. Building a direct connection with audiences is always challenging, but especially so if there was only a weak connection between publishers and their audiences to begin with.
In countries where platformisation is low, it will be important for local publishers to maintain that direct connection with their audiences. Fortunately, local publishers are particularly well-placed to do this, given that they enjoy higher than average public trust, and have close community ties. For the majority of local publishers – such as those in the USA and UK, where people prefer the news media for some types of local news, but turn to platforms for more commoditised information – the task is to identify where the opportunities lie, to understand what types of information people will come to you for, and to prioritise those.
This is of course easier said than done for many legacy publishers wedded to specific business models and ways of working, but the success of newer entrants like Mill Media in the UK shows what’s possible with a different approach. Our research from five years ago described in more detail how a range of local publishers across different countries had already adopted a strategy of investing in high-quality, unique, digital content that audiences value and are willing to pay for (Jenkins 2020). This was summarised by one executive as ‘publish less, but publish better’ – and it remains good advice.
Footnotes
1 The local questions referred to in this chapter were asked in all markets except Chile, Kenya, and Nigeria.