Journalism’s overlooked key to public trust

Accessibility rebuilds broken bonds with news audiences while bringing new engagement

At its heart, journalism is a public service.

But if readers can’t understand, access, or engage with the content, this see public service fails.

Dense jargon, complex sentence structures, and unexplained acronyms may signal expertise to insiders but often alienate general audiences.

The result is a subtle but powerful erosion of trust: if people feel the news is not written for them, they are less likely to believe in its relevance, accuracy, or authority.

Trust begins with being understood

On social media, there are a lot of people who show their distrust of the media at large, as well as specific media outlets, said Patrick Garvin, an accessibility consultant and expert who runs the social media handles @a11yawareness. And many of those people airing their grievances don’t necessarily have accessibility on their radar, because they aren’t adding alt text to their own images. So accessibility efforts are not going to win over the people who don’t appreciate accessibility themselves.

Outlets that published information in plain language gain wider readership and are frequently cited on social platforms, while reporting filled with technical jargon or reporting that is pay-walled often drives audiences elsewhere. The audiences sometimes go to less reliable but easier-to-understand sources.

Clarity is not simply about good writing; it directly shapes whether journalism is trusted or dismissed.

Social media as an accessibility battleground

Social media has transformed the way people communicate with each other and share information, with both positive and negative consequences for accessibility practices, said Kat Tenbarge, a reporter covering internet culture. Tenbarge writes the newsletter Spitfire News. People with disabilities have been able to harness social media to have greater participation in the public sphere, and social media has been a useful tool for education.

Much of the push for accessibility has come from social media platforms rather than traditional newsrooms. Twitter (now X), Instagram, and LinkedIn have introduced alt text prompts, automatic captioning, and font size adjustments. TikTok creators often use subtitles and visual cues by default, normalizing accessibility practices for younger audiences.

But these platforms also highlight the uneven adoption of such practices in professional journalism.

A content creator uploading subtitled TikToks about city council meetings may reach more viewers, including people who are deaf or hard of hearing, than a major news site that fails to caption its video packages. This dynamic raises uncomfortable questions: if accessibility is a marker of inclusivity, why are newsrooms lagging behind influencers in meeting these standards?

Platforms are typically incentivized to attract as many users to post as much content as possible, Tenbarge said. Features like alt text are often left out of platforms entirely, and when they’re included, they’re usually optional. Platforms are likely wary to implement any mandatory features that could reduce user activity. If mandatory alt text was implemented, I would worry that users would abuse and misuse the feature in a way that could be counterproductive or even harmful.

Moreover, when accessibility is dictated by the policies of tech companies, news organizations lose control over one of their most ethical responsibilities: ensuring information is available to all. Relying on social platforms to set the tone is neither sustainable nor aligned with journalism’s public mission.

Tenbarge called it the flip side of social media, adding “when social media becomes inaccessible, that reinforces new and existing inequalities. Social media can also be used as a tool for hate and disinformation.”

---

---

The overlooked cost of inaccessibility

Accessibility failures extend beyond language.

Poor color contrast on websites makes text difficult for people to read with low vision or cognitive impairments.

Missing alt text on images excludes blind and low vision readers who rely on screen readers. Videos without closed or open captions or transcripts cut out audiences who are deaf or hard of hearing, as well as second-language learners who benefit from reading along.

At the very least, Garvin said, missing alt text sends the message that blind people and other users of screen readers are not at the front of mind for the publication. It might not be an intentional, malicious inclusion, but it definitely lets screen reader users know they are not a top priority.

These oversights send an implicit message: this reporting is not for you. Over time, that perception undermines trust in both the individual outlet and journalism as a whole.

For communities already skeptical of the media, inaccessibility can confirm suspicions that their needs are secondary. In this way, seemingly small design choices contribute to the broader crisis of public trust.

But accessibility choices do make a difference.

Social media metrics are powerful incentives for both platforms and users, Tenbarge said. Graphics with elements like sharp color contrast that are more vibrant and readable (and therefore accessible) are more likely to get more engagement than graphics that are hard to read or see.

Accessibility as ethics, not optics

One of the most common misconceptions about accessibility is that it is primarily a legal or compliance requirement — something to tick off or avoid lawsuits. While frameworks like the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) are important, they should not define the ceiling of newsroom ambition.

Accessibility is fundamentally about ethics. If journalism is to serve as a watchdog, a public square, and a mirror of society, it cannot afford to exclude readers through neglectful design or opaque language. A commitment to accessibility signals respect for all audiences, not just the most literate, nondisabled, or tech-savvy. This respect is the foundation of trust.

I think you can’t fully communicate to your audience if you are leaving out a big part of your audience, Garvin said. Making journalism accessible to people with disabilities is vital to the mission of journalism because it allows the work to get to as many people as possible. And I think that getting your work to as many people as possible should be a goal of journalists and media organizations.

Rebuilding trust through accessibility

Rebuilding trust in journalism is a complex challenge, but accessibility offers a concrete starting point. It moves the conversation beyond abstract debates about bias and toward tangible practices that demonstrate inclusivity. When readers encounter content that is easy to understand, navigate, and engage with, they are more likely to view the outlet as reliable and respectful of their needs.

In a three-part series on news avoidance, the organization Trusting News said one way to adapt products for news avoiders was to “make products feel more accessible.”

Far too often, news coverage assumes people have a certain level of knowledge or buy-in with a topic. This can perpetuate the feeling that the news is made for certain groups of people — often, the already engaged. And that, research shows, causes the less engaged to further tune out.

People shouldn’t need to be experts or political fanatics to understand news. But often, the news feels like an insider’s game, full of jargon and missing context. If you’re not already an [sic] paying close attention, daily journalism is too often just not designed for you to comprehend.

This accessibility is also something we should be examining when thinking about the delivery of news.

Accessibility also broadens journalism’s reach. By making stories accessible to disabled people, people who are still learning the language, and those with limited literacy skills, newsrooms can tap into audiences that traditional practices have excluded.

In a time of shrinking trust and shrinking revenues, ignoring these communities is both ethically and strategically shortsighted.

---

Akinyele Akintomiwa Michael is a freelance journalist and content writer whose work explores the intersection of technology, accessibility, and storytelling. He focuses on making digital spaces more inclusive while simplifying complex ideas for readers across industries.

---