In a landscape where creators command more attention than many traditional news brands on external platforms, the question isn’t if we should work with them but how. 

Let me lay out my case. 

Creators aren’t just a passing trend — they’re deeply embedded in how content is consumed and shared. If you don’t believe me, let me share two things. 

Firstly, Reuters’ Digital News Report shows that on almost every social platform, users pay more attention to personalities/celebrities than they do to mainstream news/journalists. And if that’s not enough, consider this statistic, which surprised me when I saw it: Joe Rogan’s audience is more than CNN and The New York Times combined. 

For media brands, this presents a new discovery channel, one that feels uncomfortable at first but has the potential to bring a broader and more engaged audience.

Collaborating with creators may mean relinquishing some control. It’s not an easy shift, but done thoughtfully, it can align seamlessly with your brand values. Consider introducing an expert you respect or a subject-matter authority to your audience in the form of a trusted creator. This isn’t entirely foreign — you could think of it as a modern twist on the opinion pages you’ve always run.

One potential pitfall around this is that a relationship can end. So do you lose that audience? Some audience members might follow a creator when they leave, but that’s OK. As KCRW insightfully shared during our Los Angeles executive study tour in October, they aren’t chasing “fake friends and dead ends.” The key is finding creators whose personal brands overlap with yours, creating mutual value. 

These partnerships tap into what Google News Initiative calls “brand lovers” or what YouTube identifies as “fandom.” Here is an example that illustrates the potential of fandom and letting creators have some reign with content: While the Met Gala attracted 13 million views, secondary streams about the event brought in over 600 million. 

People don’t just consume — they share, comment, and make content their own. The question for media brands is: How do we create experiences and content that people can take and reshape into their own narratives — while keeping content honest?

The balance of control and brand identity

For those uneasy about the thought of creators representing their brand, it’s important to note this isn’t a one-size-fits-all strategy. Hard news should remain untouched by this approach. But most media companies are already producing a range of content beyond hard news — entertainment, lifestyle, culture — all of which are ripe for creator collaboration.

Successful partnerships often preserve control where it matters. Creators can use their social platforms to drive traffic back to your owned and operated (O&O) properties while you amplify them on your channels. In one instance, a media company structured agreements so both parties shared ownership of a newsletter audience, ensuring continuity even if a creator moved on.

But for any of this to work, the foundation is your brand identity.

Who are you? What do you stand for? Do your products reflect that in a way that resonates across touchpoints? Next year, I’ll delve into different distribution channels and platforms where our brands meet our audiences. We need to understand not just where we’re present but how we’re engaging people. Newswhip had an interesting report on the social side of that here.  

The creator economy in an AI-driven world

AI is here, and it’s going to redefine content creation. 

While today’s AI-generated material is already impressive, what’s coming next is poised to be game-changing. Some creators will thrive in this environment, but as journalists and truth tellers, we have a unique edge.

Amid growing confusion about what’s real and what isn’t, truth can become a brand differentiator. Trust and authenticity will matter more than ever, positioning media brands for a compelling role in a noisy, AI-driven world. Those we partner with also have to reflect those values.

As media brands, we’re in a unique position to balance innovation with responsibility. Working with creators and leveraging AI aren’t just opportunities — they’re necessities for staying relevant in a fast-changing world. And the brands that are confident enough to embrace these shifts will find that letting go isn’t losing control — it’s gaining a greater, more loyal audience.

We can — and should — work with creators. They are here to stay (and are often much more popular than news brands where content is being consumed on external channels). Consumers love them, and they can deliver tangential audiences, which could just prove a new and desperately needed discovery channel. 

That is going to mean losing a bit of control. And that will feel uncomfortable. But I am convinced that if it is done in the right way — such as bringing in a legal expert who is also a creator we respect — it’s very much like the opinion pages we run now. 

Will some audiences move on if a creator leaves? Yes, they will. But as KCRW told us, they are not interested in “fake friends and dead ends.” If you find the right creators, you will find brand resonance and overlap that add value on both sides. 

Next year, I want to append some time looking at all our audience touchpoints: What platforms do our products reach people on? In what capacity? 

AI generated material is coming and it’s going to be excellent. What is possible today is pretty damn good. What’s coming down the track is simply excellent. Although once executive told us that while we are 95% there with AI-generated content, that last 5% will take as long as the first 95%. 

This is entertainment and creators will have a field day. We are not creators. We are journalists and truth tellers. That in itself is an opportunity to stand out. In a world where we have no idea what’s real and what’s not, truth telling is likely to be a differentiator. 

If you’d like to subscribe to my bi-weekly newsletter, INMA members can do so here.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .