At the 17th Malaysia Journalists Exchange Programme held in late November, Singapore’s Minister for Digital Development and Information, Josephine Teo, noted that Singaporeans continue to place high trust in public service media outlets such as The Straits Times and Lianhe Zaobao, regarding their quality journalism as authoritative and reliable sources of information—a reassuring development.

In Malaysia, however, media trust varies significantly across different reader demographics. Among Chinese-language readers, Sin Chew Daily and China Press wield the widest influence; among English readers, The Star has the largest circulation; the Indian community traditionally follows Nanban; while Malay readers generally favor Berita Harian, Harian Metro, Utusan Malaysia, and Sinar Harian. Harakah—the official newspaper of Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS)—also maintains a strong readership base along the east coast.

Beyond these traditional outlets, digital-native news platforms, social media channels like TikTok, YouTube, and Facebook, and emerging multilingual news websites have seen their influence grow rapidly among younger audiences, accelerating the shift in information consumption habits toward digital platforms.

Official or ruling-party-affiliated media, on the other hand, have suffered from persistently low public trust over the past two decades—largely due to perceived excessive government interference and a highly polarized media environment. This lack of credibility affects not only print publications but also national broadcasters like Radio Televisyen Malaysia (RTM). Recently, RTM faced yet another credibility crisis when one of its commentators mistakenly referred to Indonesia’s, Singapore’s, and Thailand’s current leaders during a live broadcast of the 47th ASEAN Summit as “Jokowi,” “Lee Hsien Loong,” and “Srettha”—names that are outdated or incorrect—drawing widespread criticism.

Yet the “media distrust” crisis is not unique to Malaysia—it has become a global phenomenon.

According to long-term polling by Gallup, a U.S.-based data analytics and consulting firm, public trust in newspapers, television, and radio stood between 68% and 72% in the 1970s. By the late 1990s and early 2000s, this figure had dropped to 51%–55%. In 2024, only 31% of respondents believed the media reported news “fully, accurately, and fairly.”

In Malaysia, a 2021 joint survey by the International Federation of Journalists and Merdeka Center revealed that only 15% of respondents believed domestic media were performing well, while about 45% held negative or dissatisfied views toward the press.

In February 2024, Malaysia’s Ministry of Communications released a revised version of the Code of Ethics for Journalism, emphasizing principles such as accuracy, fairness, and integrity, claiming it was designed to adapt to the modern media landscape and combat disinformation. However, numerous civil society groups expressed concern that the code could be abused by the government to suppress dissent and undermine press freedom. Despite the new guidelines, state-linked media continue to be perceived as biased and lacking credibility—a problem compounded by weak internal editorial standards, such as insufficient fact-checking prior to publication. Moreover, the legacy of decades of media suppression, control, and interference under the Barisan Nasional (BN) government has severely damaged journalistic credibility and quality. Even after BN’s fall from power, efforts by the Pakatan Harapan (PH) coalition to establish an independent Media Council—a self-regulatory body for the industry—have faced repeated setbacks. Even if such a council is eventually formed, there is no guarantee it will remain free from government interference.

In the digital age, mainstream media—including state-run outlets—are forced into fierce competition with social media influencers and platforms, often losing ground in the race for speed, sensationalism, and virality. As the public is bombarded daily with vast amounts of social media content, fake news, and plagiarism scandals—and as some mainstream outlets increasingly cite unverified online sources—readers (particularly the highly educated) now base their trust primarily on whether reporting is impartial, avoids exaggeration or incitement, and aligns with their own values and professional standards.

Although there is no universally agreed definition or measurement for “media trust,” the academic journal Communication Research and Practice identifies three widely accepted characteristics of news trust:

First, it stems from a vulnerable psychological reliance by the public, who willingly and actively accept the media’s role in carefully weighing information.

Second, it inherently involves uncertainty, unpredictability, and risk—since audiences cannot control journalists’ or editors’ actions and may face unmet expectations.

Third, it serves a stabilizing social function, especially when information is incomplete or difficult to verify (as seen during the recent global pandemic, when conflicting claims about vaccines and the virus abounded).

Faced with persistently low public trust, declining willingness to pay for subscriptions, and an existential threat to the journalism profession, what solutions exist for the media industry?

A study in Australia (with a sample size of 1,619 respondents) found that the public most strongly supports measures such as “reducing bias and subjective commentary in reporting,” “requiring journalists to disclose conflicts of interest,” and “increasing the volume of in-depth reporting.” In contrast, “boosting journalists’ social media activity” received little endorsement.

Rebuilding public trust in news media is not a task that media alone can accomplish.

Media literacy education must be urgently promoted worldwide to cultivate the public’s ability to trace sources and critically analyze information. Only when audiences enhance their capacity for rational judgment—and when media organizations simultaneously strengthen self-regulation, uphold professional rigor, and adhere to ethical standards—can trust in journalism be genuinely restored.

At the 17th Malaysia Journalists Exchange Programme held in late November, Singapore’s Minister for Digital Development and Information, Josephine Teo, noted that Singaporeans continue to place high trust in public service media outlets such as The Straits Times and Lianhe Zaobao, regarding their quality journalism as authoritative and reliable sources of information—a reassuring development.

In Malaysia, however, media trust varies significantly across different reader demographics. Among Chinese-language readers, Sin Chew Daily and China Press wield the widest influence; among English readers, The Star has the largest circulation; the Indian community traditionally follows Nanban; while Malay readers generally favor Berita Harian, Harian Metro, Utusan Malaysia, and Sinar Harian. Harakah—the official newspaper of Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS)—also maintains a strong readership base along the east coast.

Beyond these traditional outlets, digital-native news platforms, social media channels like TikTok, YouTube, and Facebook, and emerging multilingual news websites have seen their influence grow rapidly among younger audiences, accelerating the shift in information consumption habits toward digital platforms.

Official or ruling-party-affiliated media, on the other hand, have suffered from persistently low public trust over the past two decades—largely due to perceived excessive government interference and a highly polarized media environment. This lack of credibility affects not only print publications but also national broadcasters like Radio Televisyen Malaysia (RTM). Recently, RTM faced yet another credibility crisis when one of its commentators mistakenly referred to Indonesia’s, Singapore’s, and Thailand’s current leaders during a live broadcast of the 47th ASEAN Summit as “Jokowi,” “Lee Hsien Loong,” and “Srettha”—names that are outdated or incorrect—drawing widespread criticism.

Yet the “media distrust” crisis is not unique to Malaysia—it has become a global phenomenon.

According to long-term polling by Gallup, a U.S.-based data analytics and consulting firm, public trust in newspapers, television, and radio stood between 68% and 72% in the 1970s. By the late 1990s and early 2000s, this figure had dropped to 51%–55%. In 2024, only 31% of respondents believed the media reported news “fully, accurately, and fairly.”

In Malaysia, a 2021 joint survey by the International Federation of Journalists and Merdeka Center revealed that only 15% of respondents believed domestic media were performing well, while about 45% held negative or dissatisfied views toward the press.

In February 2024, Malaysia’s Ministry of Communications released a revised version of the Code of Ethics for Journalism, emphasizing principles such as accuracy, fairness, and integrity, claiming it was designed to adapt to the modern media landscape and combat disinformation. However, numerous civil society groups expressed concern that the code could be abused by the government to suppress dissent and undermine press freedom. Despite the new guidelines, state-linked media continue to be perceived as biased and lacking credibility—a problem compounded by weak internal editorial standards, such as insufficient fact-checking prior to publication. Moreover, the legacy of decades of media suppression, control, and interference under the Barisan Nasional (BN) government has severely damaged journalistic credibility and quality. Even after BN’s fall from power, efforts by the Pakatan Harapan (PH) coalition to establish an independent Media Council—a self-regulatory body for the industry—have faced repeated setbacks. Even if such a council is eventually formed, there is no guarantee it will remain free from government interference.

In the digital age, mainstream media—including state-run outlets—are forced into fierce competition with social media influencers and platforms, often losing ground in the race for speed, sensationalism, and virality. As the public is bombarded daily with vast amounts of social media content, fake news, and plagiarism scandals—and as some mainstream outlets increasingly cite unverified online sources—readers (particularly the highly educated) now base their trust primarily on whether reporting is impartial, avoids exaggeration or incitement, and aligns with their own values and professional standards.

Although there is no universally agreed definition or measurement for “media trust,” the academic journal Communication Research and Practice identifies three widely accepted characteristics of news trust:

First, it stems from a vulnerable psychological reliance by the public, who willingly and actively accept the media’s role in carefully weighing information.

Second, it inherently involves uncertainty, unpredictability, and risk—since audiences cannot control journalists’ or editors’ actions and may face unmet expectations.

Third, it serves a stabilizing social function, especially when information is incomplete or difficult to verify (as seen during the recent global pandemic, when conflicting claims about vaccines and the virus abounded).

Faced with persistently low public trust, declining willingness to pay for subscriptions, and an existential threat to the journalism profession, what solutions exist for the media industry?

A study in Australia (with a sample size of 1,619 respondents) found that the public most strongly supports measures such as “reducing bias and subjective commentary in reporting,” “requiring journalists to disclose conflicts of interest,” and “increasing the volume of in-depth reporting.” In contrast, “boosting journalists’ social media activity” received little endorsement.

Rebuilding public trust in news media is not a task that media alone can accomplish.

Media literacy education must be urgently promoted worldwide to cultivate the public’s ability to trace sources and critically analyze information. Only when audiences enhance their capacity for rational judgment—and when media organizations simultaneously strengthen self-regulation, uphold professional rigor, and adhere to ethical standards—can trust in journalism be genuinely restored.