A comparative study of credibility, misinformation, and audience trust
Yangyel Lhaden, Reporter, Kuensel
I was once traveling to Paro in a cab. We were only a few minutes into the ride when the driver asked me, “So, what do you do?”
“I work as a reporter for Kuensel,” I replied.
What I thought was just a simple introduction led to a heated discussion that lasted until we reached our destination.
His face lit up. “Ah, Kuensel! That used to be the paper. Everyone read it. Every shop had a copy. If you were looking for a job, that is where you checked. Even board exam results came in Kuensel.” He chuckled, tapping the steering wheel lightly. “Now? With mobile phones and Facebook, who buys the newspaper?”
It was a familiar conversation—one I have had more than once in recent years.
He was not being dismissive. In fact, this conversation led to something deeper: a quiet concern about where we are headed. As we drove on, we talked about how things had changed—how social media now breaks the news faster than anyone can write it. But he also admitted something else, something crucial: “Even if I see it on Facebook, I wait for BBS or Kuensel to report it. You know, to be sure it is real.”
That moment stayed with me.
In an age of instant updates and viral headlines, speed seems to define what we consider “news.” But trust—earned slowly, over time—is what gives that news meaning. And it is that trust, now under pressure from misinformation and algorithm-driven feeds, that this piece seeks to explore.
That cab ride captured the essence of a growing global conversation: How is public trust in media evolving, and what happens to journalism in an age dominated by digital platforms and misinformation?
A recent comparative study by Stergios Fotopoulos, examining public trust in media across the European Union (EU), provides insight into this very question. Despite the digital boom, traditional media still holds a strong lead in terms of usage and credibility.
According to the study, television remains the most used source of news in the EU (used by 75 percent of respondents), followed by online platforms (43 percent) and radio (39 percent). Social media, although widely accessible, is trusted by only 14 percent of people. In contrast, public broadcasters enjoy the trust of nearly half of all respondents.
In Nordic countries like Finland and Denmark, trust in public service media reaches up to 73 percent. However, the picture varies by region—countries in Eastern Europe show higher trust in influencers and social media figures, highlighting the role of culture, history, and politics in shaping media trust.
Interestingly, the study found that social media’s influence has plateaued since 2016. Despite its popularity, it has not overtaken traditional media in either trust or reach.
Bhutan’s media landscape: The old and the new
Bhutan, too, is grappling with these shifts. Since the introduction of television and the internet in 1999, the country’s media landscape has expanded rapidly. Today, it includes state-owned platforms like the Bhutan Broadcasting Service (BBS), national newspapers such as Kuensel, and private media like The Bhutanese and Business Bhutan. At the same time, social media platforms—Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram—are now used widely, especially among urban youth.
In rural Bhutan, however, radio and BBS still command wide reach and respect. These platforms are seen as reliable and grounded in professional standards. And yet, the tension between reach and credibility is undeniable. While traditional media may be trusted more, social media is more accessible, faster, and often more engaging—if also more dangerous.
The double-edged sword of social media
Social media has democratised access to information. It has enabled citizen voices, amplified underrepresented perspectives, and broken monopolies on storytelling. But it has also become a hotbed for misinformation, especially during critical times like elections or national emergencies.
Bhutan has witnessed this firsthand. During the Covid-19 pandemic, social media became a battleground of information—some accurate, much of it misleading. In such times, the public instinctively turned to trusted sources like BBS or Kuensel to verify rumors. This speaks volumes about the enduring relevance of professional journalism—even in the digital age.
Yet, digital literacy remains low. Many users share unverified posts without understanding the consequences. Without intervention, this can erode public trust and damage social cohesion.
Journalism under pressure
Bhutan’s traditional media is under increasing pressure—not just from shifting audience behaviour but from within. A shrinking pool of professional journalists, economic challenges, and over-reliance on press releases have hollowed out newsrooms. Investigative journalism is becoming rare. The attrition of experienced reporters means fewer mentors for younger journalists and fewer in-depth stories that provide the nuance and analysis society needs.
This is not unique to Bhutan. Around the world, the same patterns play out: fast content replaces deep reporting, social engagement metrics trump editorial judgment, and governments increasingly communicate directly to the public, bypassing the press altogether.
But the consequences are significant. When media stops asking tough questions or becomes merely an amplifier of official narratives, it risks losing the public’s trust—and its democratic function.
Reclaiming journalism’s core purpose
What, then, can be done?
First, we must reinvest in journalism as a public good. This means supporting independent reporting, safeguarding media freedom, and ensuring access to reliable information for all.
Second, media literacy must become a national priority. Just as we teach people to read and write, we must teach them how to navigate the digital information space—how to spot fake news, understand media bias, and think critically.
Third, journalists themselves must return to the core values of the profession: accuracy, independence, verification, and ethical storytelling. In an age of speed and spin, the most valuable trait a journalist can offer is trustworthiness.
Lastly, the media must embrace innovation without abandoning integrity. Technology can be used not only to reach wider audiences but to strengthen verification processes, improve transparency, and engage citizens in meaningful ways.
Democracy and the role of media
Bhutan is a young democracy, and the media has a critical role to play in strengthening it. Journalism is more than reporting events—it is a tool for accountability, a platform for debate, and a mirror for society. As citizens, our understanding of governance, policy, and national direction is largely shaped by the quality and integrity of our media.
The pandemic reminded us of the media’s importance. In moments of uncertainty, people turned to trusted sources—not viral memes—for clarity. That trust must be nurtured, not taken for granted.
Even if traditional media becomes restricted or sidelined, society will always find ways to express itself—through art, music, film, or citizen journalism. But professional media has a responsibility that goes beyond expression—it must ensure accuracy, context, and responsibility.
As I stepped out of the taxi, the driver said, “I hope you all keep writing and reporting the truth. These days, there is so much information—and people don’t know whom to trust.”
His words were not just a farewell. In that moment, he captured the public’s growing unease and the responsibility resting on the shoulders of journalists.
Traditional media may no longer dominate the way it once did, but its values—truth, verification, and public service—remain vital.
In a time of confusion and content overload, journalism must act as a compass. And if it can uphold these principles with courage and consistency, it will not only survive—it will lead.
Note : The writer contributed this article to the Bhutan Press Mirror- A JAB Occasional Journal, which was launched on May 10, 2025 by the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Employment.
