From Paine to AI: The Quest for Trust

Information is now suspect until proven trustworthy. But this mistrust is relatively new to me. In the days before the internet, we had measured doses of news doled out in daily newspapers, and at 6:30 PM each night, on network television. Even when the news was bad, we generally believed it when Walter Cronkite assured us, “And that’s the way it is.”

So what happened? This is an oversimplification, but the information environment changed faster that we could adapt and set up new guardrails. The sheer volume and pace of information is overwhelming. The democratization of information means that everyone has a voice. The lines between straight reporting, analysis, and opinion have blurred. The rush to publish online means mistakes can circulate faster than corrections and misinformation faster than truth. Algorithms prioritize clicks, shares, and engagement, so sensational headlines and viral content may get rewarded more than carefully researched, accurate information. Now add in content generated by AI, which is subject to hallucinations, and you have a very complex content landscape. No wonder public trust is challenged.

When major news outlets produce content marred by bias, public trust is further affected. However, this problem is far from new. In the early republic, newspapers were openly partisan, often funded by political parties and unabashedly advocating their viewpoints. In fact, much non-fiction writing in the colonies was meant to sway public opinion towards a particular political goal. A good example is “Common Sense” by Thomas Paine, a 47-page pamphlet that argued for American independence from Great Britain. Yet even in the early republic, the effects of partisan writing on public trust were called out. In June 1807, Thomas Jefferson lamented to John Norvel, “nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.”

The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw a push for more objective journalism, with organizations like the Associated Press standardizing fact-based reporting. Regulatory interventions like the FCC’s 1949 Fairness Doctrine required broadcasters to present controversial issues in a balanced manner, curbing overt bias on radio and television. But then in 1987, the Fairness doctrine was repealed, and when combined with consolidation of media outlets, this change led to more sensationalized and opinion-driven content in some news agencies. Today, in response to bias and the ever increasing speed and reach of information, there’s a push for a return to more balanced, neutral information. The hope is that practices like careful research, attribution, transparency, and balance can rebuild public trust.

Tools like Ground News let readers see how the same story is told across different outlets. 1440 Daily News aims to provide a tidy, neutral daily digest. The Trust Project highlights what makes reporting trustworthy. We also have books like The Vanishing Newspaper by Philip Meyer and The Elements of Journalism by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel that explore trustworthy reporting practices.

Writers who want to deliver balanced information have more tools than ever, but they’re also under more pressure to produce content quickly. Even without diving into a book-length guide, a few simple practices can help you spot and reduce bias in your own work.

In a follow-up post, we’ll dig into details like word choice and framing, with examples showing how language can tilt a story without changing the facts. In the meantime, precise wording, clear sourcing, and thoughtful context are your superpowers for building credibility and trust.