Terry Flew

The contemporary news environment faces significant challenges, including information overload and declining attention for traditional news organizations. A central issue is news media trust and its role in democratic life. However, what constitutes 'trust' in news and how it is measured is subject to ongoing debate, complicating the widespread reliance on surveys to track public trust. This study examines how trust in news media has been defined and operationalized in survey research, identifying commonalities, divergences, and gaps. We conducted a systematic literature review of 131 recent articles, focusing on 37 that employed large-scale surveys, to investigate trust's conception and implementation. We analyzed how these surveys developed questions and scales to reflect their definitions. Our review shows points of convergence but also significant disagreement in how scholars conceptualize trust. This lack of consistency makes it challenging to consolidate research and generalize results, problematizing the meaning of public trust surveys. We propose a consolidated conception of news media trust that reconciles varied trust conceptions and the ambiguous boundaries of today's news media. This reframing aims to strengthen future survey research by providing a clearer, more inclusive foundation for measuring news media trust.

The contemporary news environment faces significant challenges, including information overload and declining attention for traditional news organizations. A central issue is news media trust and its role in democratic life. However, what constitutes ‘trust’ in news and how it is measured is subject to ongoing debate, complicating the widespread reliance on surveys to track public trust. This study examines how trust in news media has been defined and operationalized in survey research, identifying commonalities, divergences, and gaps. We conducted a systematic literature review of 131 recent articles, focusing on 37 that employed large-scale surveys, to investigate trust's conception and implementation. We analyzed how these surveys developed questions and scales to reflect their definitions. Our review shows points of convergence but also significant disagreement in how scholars conceptualize trust. This lack of consistency makes it challenging to consolidate research and generalize results, problematizing the meaning of public trust surveys. We propose a consolidated conception of news media trust that reconciles varied trust conceptions and the ambiguous boundaries of today's news media. This reframing aims to strengthen future survey research by providing a clearer, more inclusive foundation for measuring news media trust.

This article examines a significant paradox within the global AI policy landscape, which is the proliferation of AI policies by nation states vs. the perception that national regulation of global technologies like AI is largely ineffective. While the United States, China and the European Union have been claimed to be ‘Digital Empires’ shaping AI governance, this study focuses on the approaches of two middle-sized nations, the United Kingdom and Australia. Both countries, outside the ‘Digital Empires’, have historically been significant policy agents in the global digital space and are developing distinctive AI policy frameworks. Through a qualitative content analysis of six generative AI (GenAI) policy documents from 2021 to 2024, the article identifies shared policy foundations – commitment to domestic AI sector growth and recognition of AI’s transformative potential – but highlights divergences in leadership aspirations and implementation methodologies. The United Kingdom prioritizes AI research and industrial dominance with aspirational objectives, while Australia focuses on trustworthiness, safety and accountability through practical measures and integration with existing governance instruments. This study contributes to understanding the global AI policy landscape by examining how middle powers navigate AI governance amidst the influence of global tech giants and the major AI powers.

In this dialogue, Professor Terry Flew first explains the real-world changes and theoretical underpinnings that have prompted his Australian Research Council (ARC) Laureate Fellowship to study media and public trust. Based on the concept of mediated trust, he reveals the relationship between trust, power and communication technologies. Professor Flew then elaborates on how artificial intelligence (AI) affects trust in human–machine and interpersonal relationships, and how governments and technology companies shape public trust in AI in a complex geopolitical environment. Finally, Flew explores ways to foster public trust and encourages communication research to actively embrace changes in technology and society.

This paper examines how digital platforms have come to embody a new form of media power, reshaping the Australian media economy and challenging traditional understandings of media influence. While legacy media power was grounded in content ownership and political influence, platform power today stems from infrastructural dominance, algorithmic control, and the commodification of user data. Drawing on the concept of the network media economy, the paper explores how tech giants like Alphabet and Meta have overtaken traditional Australian media firms in advertising revenue and market influence. Using metrics such as Concentration Ratio (CR4) and the Herfindahl–Hirschman Index, the paper demonstrates the extreme consolidation within digital services sectors. It also considers the political implications of this shift, highlighting how platform companies are increasingly influential in shaping public discourse and policy, both directly and through their economic leverage. The paper argues for a reframing of media power that encompasses both traditional and emerging forms of dominance, urging policy responses that reflect the integrated, multi-sectoral nature of today's media landscape.

This article examines Australia's Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 as a case study in digital policy formation, focusing on the socio-political processes that shaped its development. Framing the debate through Celia Lury's concept of ‘problem spaces’, the article explores how the issue of youth and social media use is constructed through ‘givens’ (perceived risks), ‘goals’ (protection), and contested ‘operators’ (policy solutions). Drawing on public opinion surveys and stakeholder submissions to a parliamentary inquiry, the article finds widespread public concern about online harms, especially for minors, but disagreement about how best to address them. While the Act's age restriction was broadly supported by the public and a majority of stakeholders, critics warn of unintended consequences and advocate alternative measures including media literacy and platform accountability. The case reveals broader tensions in digital governance between public demand for action, legislative responsiveness, and competing visions of youth digital rights.