Infotainment and the Expanding Definition of News

With the rise of digital media, the boundaries of what counts as “news” have become increasingly blurred.

According to a 2026 report by the Reuters Institute, roughly 75% of respondents across six countries still retain a “traditional core” definition of news centered on newspapers, television, radio, and dedicated news websites.

But that figure contains an important divide: 49% hold a predominantly traditional definition, while another 26% combine that core with newer sources and formats such as social media, podcasts, short-form video, and AI chatbots.

The report examines what respondents counted as “news” across five key dimensions:

1. Topic: What is it about?
Politics, the economy, military conflicts, and climate change are widely recognized as news, while sports, entertainment, gaming, and fashion are more contested in their “newsiness.” For topics at the edges, the distinction often depends on personal interest and perceived relevance.

2. Source: Where did we encounter it?
A television news report or dedicated news website is clearly labeled as news. Newer channels such as social media, podcasts, and AI chatbots can mix, repackage, or relay news without clearly separating it from other content—or identifying where it originally came from.

3. Actor: Who presented it?
Journalists, experts, and public officials remain at the traditional core, but creators, influencers, activists, celebrities, and ordinary people can now report on and interpret current events.

4. Genre: What kind of information is it?
Reporting and investigations are readily recognized as news, while commentary, debate, satire, and comedy blur the boundaries between information, interpretation, and entertainment.

5. Format: How is it delivered?
An evening TV news program, a detailed written article, or a quick news update on the radio fit familiar expectations of news. Expanded definitions also include short TikTok clips, brief written posts, and long podcast conversations.

These are useful dimensions for understanding what people consider news, but they can combine in many different ways. A journalist can publish a verified report through a short TikTok video, while an influencer can discuss a military conflict on a comedy podcast.

News presents itself in many different contexts, which is one big reason our current information landscape can be so hard to navigate.

The Blurring of Information and Entertainment

The expanding definition of “news” touches on the growing overlap between information and entertainment.

Interviews and debates are still recognized as common forms of news, but things get fuzzier with opinion, commentary, and satire. A podcast host can mix factual updates with personal reactions, an influencer can post a funny meme about the latest scandal, and a comedian can explain a political controversy while making jokes about it. This blending of information and entertainment is commonly called infotainment.

Treating something as “just entertainment” can give us a reason to let our guard down. We may laugh at a joke without questioning the assumptions behind it because “it’s just a joke,” so we feel no need to analyze it further. But these interpretations of current events can still seep in and shape our map of reality over time.

So even when we don’t consider something “news,” it can still influence how we interpret the news.

Relatability, Trust, and the “Bedroom Effect”

People don’t just consume content for fun. We also form parasocial bonds with creators and commentators, which makes it feel like we are receiving the news through trustworthy and likable friends. This personal connection can make their interpretations of current events feel more relatable and more credible than the same interpretations delivered by a prestigious but more distant institution.

One participant in the Reuters Institute report described the appeal of these more relatable presenters:

“Relatability is like talking about stuff that affects lots of people as well … I could relate to a certain person because they’re delivering the news [from] a regular apartment, you know, they have regular clothes … The expensive anchor that’s been there for 15 years, they want to seem relatable when they’re talking about the economy, but it’s just something cringey about watching a millionaire talk about the economy when there’s nothing to relate there.” – Adrian, USA, 33

A bedroom or ordinary apartment can appear more authentic than an expensive studio, especially to audiences already skeptical of mainstream institutions. This “bedroom effect” can also be deliberately cultivated. Researchers have described a conscious strategy known as calibrated amateurism: the deliberate production of content that looks raw, spontaneous, and unfiltered, even when there may be a lot of professional effort, time, and money going into it.

The rise of independent, personal content creation can introduce people to new ideas and perspectives that mainstream sources overlook. But it also risks spreading misinformation and information pollution when creators lack formal editorial oversight. Feeling familiar with someone doesn’t tell us how carefully they’ve checked what they’re saying, even though research suggests we’re more likely to trust familiar personalities.

We also risk falling into an “influencer silo,” where one favorite personality becomes our main filter for which stories matter and how to interpret them, and we end up tuning out all other perspectives and opinions.

The Manipulation of Hard Facts

One defining feature of news for most people is the expectation that it be grounded in facts and evidence.

Evidence still has to be interpreted though, and someone can report all the facts correctly while drawing a completely wrong conclusion. Statistics are a common example: numbers may be technically accurate and carry an aura of objectivity while still creating a misleading picture when presented without the right context.

Videos and photographs often feel like hard evidence that can’t be ignored, but even these can be presented out of context, paired with misleading headlines, or used to support bogus body language analysis.

One common example of this is someone freezing a specific frame in a video, then drawing a bunch of circles or lines around a facial expression or gesture, and treating it as incontrovertible proof of someone’s deeper motives or intentions. This kind of armchair psychoanalysis often goes far beyond what the footage actually shows. We don’t necessarily know how someone ‘should’ act in a highly stressful situation; the hot/cold empathy gap demonstrates how we can even misjudge how we ourselves would react under that pressure.

From Information to Understanding

Much of the Better Inputs project is focused on how to navigate this messy world of information.

One helpful guide is the Information Pyramid, which shows how to quickly evaluate various types of information you receive throughout the day, from rumors and social media posts to documentaries and scientific research.

A general habit of double-checking important claims is the bare minimum in today’s information environment. No source should be taken completely for granted. Trusted media institutions, popular influencers, scientific papers, and AI chatbots can all make mistakes, omit context, or mischaracterize what the evidence actually shows.

The goal isn’t to distrust everything, but to know when to slow down, look closer, and decide how new information fits into our broader understanding of the world.