A large number of digital native media outlets emerged in Latin America in recent decades. It’s contributed, in part, to the fragmentation of audiences. Yet, these news organizations also have the potential to help bridge communities and build consensus in polarized societies.
Higgins Joyce interviewed citizens, journalists and media executives from Argentina, Brazil and Colombia for his research. She also analyzed existing data and conducted his own survey. (Photo: Albert Suarez)
That is one of the main premises of the new book by Brazilian journalist and researcher Vanessa de Macedo Higgins Joyce, “Digital-Native News in South America. Building Bridges with Diverse Audiences in Argentina, Brazil and Colombia.” According to the author, digital native news media can tackle polarization in two ways: by offering a diversity of news from different perspectives, and by targeting their coverage to a variety of audiences.
Higgins Joyce, an associate professor in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Texas State University, interviewed audience members, journalists and media executives in Argentina, Brazil, and Colombia. She also analyzed existing data and conducted her own survey with the objective of diving into the relationship between digital native news outlets and growing social polarization across those Latin American countries.
The research findings challenge the prevailing assumption that digital media tend to lead to polarization, as cited in the book. Higgins Joyce told LatAm Journalism Review (LJR) that by exposing audiences to a wider range of perspectives, digital news organizations can play a key role in lessening the extreme viewpoints that have created divides, not only in those three countries, but in the whole region.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
LJR: What inspired your interest in researching the link between digital native news organizations and social polarization in Argentina, Brazil and Colombia?
Vanessa de Macedo Higgins Joyce: I am from Brazil and I researched and paid a lot of attention to the news environment in Latin America, and more recently I was noticing how there seemed to be a lot of divides –mainly very emotional divides– on political and social issues that were very evident.
So I was really curious to see how the emergence of independent digital news organizations was related to these more visible divides happening in South America. I was interested in understanding both parts of that issue better, and seeing if they were connected, and if so, in what ways.
LJR: How do your research findings compare to your initial theory?
VHJ: I had been working with theories around consensus building as a consequence of agenda setting, and I knew that, in mass media, that was possible because people didn't have alternative routes. They had to take the bridge, if that makes sense.
My question for this research was if, now that we have these excellent digital native media providing all sorts of different perspectives, would it be harder to find consensus? In some sense, I was hoping to find that it was possible [to find consensus], but I thought I would find that it was not.
But I did find that it is possible, both when audiences are exposed to these repertoire of news from different perspectives, and also when they count on those organizations, when they are following them on social media or subscribing to their newsletters, etcetera. If those organizations have this aim for inclusion, it is possible to build consensus.
[Editor’s note: In her book, Higgins Joyce takes the concept of consensus building from author Harold Lasswell to define the sharing of common ground for deliberation, as a major function of news media that, by bringing different groups of society together, can aid mobilization and prevent social threats.]
LJR: Does that mean that digital news media contributes to reducing polarization?
VHJ: News use in general –from the evidence that I saw– reduced issue extremity, which is one way of looking at polarization. So the more people in these three countries used news media in general, the less likely they were to have extreme views on issues.
Looking at the current media environment, there's more audience fragmentation, which would lead to polarization. But in these three countries what I saw was kind of the opposite: digital news and television both had the ability to bring more people together. Meaning, people had more options from a repertoire of news to look at, and with that exposure they brought in their horizon, they were less likely to be polarized.
LJR: How does digital news achieve this?
VHJ: This new digital media environment gives the audience a wide range of options of news and information to look for. Some of them are much more inclusive and much more independent, and people are no longer dependent on only one news organization, or on only a few, like we were 30 years ago.
That allows the audiences to broaden their perspectives and learn more about others’ points of views. From a news media organization’s point of view, the variety of topics and the engagement with a variety of audiences is also important. That is also an important part of reducing polarization and providing a more inclusive news environment in these countries: news media also need to be thinking about broadening their perspective to a variety of audiences.
LJR: Other authors have found that people tend to look for information that confirms their beliefs and their opinions, the confirmation bias. What role did that play in your research?
VHJ: People not only want to confirm their biases but they want to confirm their beliefs. They're not seeking information, they're seeking confirmation. That happens, but from a news organization perspective, they're providing a wide range of stories in a day. And even in one story, they can intentionally provide multiple perspectives, and that's where the intentionality of being aware of including other audiences is important.
I think both things happen: audiences do seek confirmation when they're looking for information that relates to those ideologies, but then they also seek information that helps them guide their daily issues that are important for them. And in those instances, I think it is even more likely to cross paths with people with different ideologies, which is what is relevant in this idea of reducing polarization.
Especially in local issues, or issues that have more direct impact in their daily lives, audiences want to understand more holistically what's happening.
LJR: Some leaders in the countries you focused on have accused the news media of creating polarization and of trying to make people believe in a certain way. But your research indicates that news media can actually create consensus. What’s the reality here?
VHJ: I think it's a matter of purpose. From these political figures’ point of view, especially some populist figures that we have in South America, that game plan is to decrease people’s trust in media because when they say “don't trust news” or they accuse news media of bringing in a perspective, or being against them, they inflame their base and make them distrust that information. If citizens lose trust in news and start trusting that information coming from those populist politicians that have interest in controlling the narrative, it's very difficult to regain trust when they need information.
One of the main premises of Higgins Joyce's book is that digital native news media can address polarization. (Photo: Albert Suarez)
Who should you trust, then? I think it's a matter of goals: what is the goal of the politician vs. what's the goal of a news organization. The goal of a politician is to persuade, to gain support, while the goal of the news organization should be to inform, to have people more involved in civic life and to bring issues to light.
I don't want to say that those are the goals of every digital native news organization, but there are definitely some excellent examples of digital news organizations that do exactly that: inform, bring different perspectives, be inclusive and engage audiences in the social and political realities.
LJR: Your book also talks about the capacity of news media to build bridges, not only between the audience and the media outlets, but also between opposing groups of people. How can news media do this?
VHJ: In this digital news environment where there are many media outlets, there's a lot of competition. So from a digital news perspective, what often ends up happening is that they specialize and they focus on niche audiences, so that can have an impact on one group, or one type of group. But when they do that, they lack the potential to be the bridge to bring people together.
For example, if you are a digital news organization that focuses on women's issues, that’s such an important and necessary perspective out there, but if you don't bring in some male perspectives, you don't provide a space for conversation. So while your perspective is very important, it's only as impactful in terms of consensus building if you can include the others, so that changes happen. So to be a bridge, you have to be thinking of reaching out to different communities.
LJR. How can a digital media outlet tackle a specific niche, but at the same time talk to different audiences?
VHJ: Some of these news organizations end up looking for a niche to be able to survive and fight competition in that environment, but this leads to more segmentation. So I think it's just a matter of being cognizant of not excluding audiences who might be interested in the issues and topics and news that you are bringing, and who would benefit from the perspectives that you're bringing them, but not to alienate the others in that story.
I don’t say it’s easy, but I think it’s important. Issues that concern women are also issues that are important to men, to continue with that example. But I won't bring much change if only women are [coming into contact with] my news. You don't have to exclude men to be inclusive of women.
LJR: Another important topic you talk about is credibility and trust in news in Argentina, Brazil and Colombia. What’s the link between this and polarization?
VHJ: The more credible [audiences] deem digital news, the more likely they are to access them, then the more likely they are to be exposed to them.
The difficulty in these three countries is that in the past –for different reasons and with different contexts–, even though there were fewer news media options out there, oftentimes they excluded a large portion of the population. It was a much less inclusive news that was provided back in the 70s, 80s and even 90s. News media back then left a lot to be desired in terms of credibility. Audiences in these three countries, especially older audiences, do have this love-hate relationship with news now.
So when you have this emergence of populist leaders that attack the credibility of news and journalists, that really damages all of the news organization's credibility by claiming the media is enemy number one, like many do. So when the purpose is information seeking, people tend to have more credibility of the information that they are receiving and therefore leads to more news use. But at the same time you have this social environment where there's a lot of actors that push this narrative of distrust, so there's a big decline in trust in news.
LJR: What are some examples of digital native news media in Latin America that are doing a good job building bridges and consensus among polarized societies?
VHJ: There are many. Nexo in Brazil does a really good job. Ecofeminita, in Argentina, is an organization created by women that is really being successful when bringing a wider perspective.
La Pulla, [a satirical opinion YouTube show] in Colombia, they are bridging age divides with their coverage, and they are thoughtful of that. They want to include young audiences and they are successful at that. Their focus is on bringing their stories with humor in a way that attracts both older and younger audiences. La Cola de Rata also does well with age divide, both with humor and different narratives.
As well in Colombia, La Silla Vacía is another example in including women’s voices in reporting of issues of power. I did a study with their audience’s comments and found empirical evidence of consensus building among men and women.
There are a lot of examples of how they can have a niche audience they focus on, but that have the potential to be a bridge between different audiences.
