From Fake News to French Subsidies: The Global Media Meltdown

Donald Trump has upended American politics twice—each time, he humbled the media. His 2016 victory was often attributed to his television fame while being an ‘outsider’. In reality, it marked the debut of a politician who wielded greater mastery over the media than they do over their own stars. Eight years later, his triumph was no surprise. Voters returned him to power precisely because he positioned himself against the establishment, embodied by CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post, which he branded as purveyors of ‘fake news’. By returning to the White House, he brought the war he had declared on the mainstream to a close.

His success mirrors a wider crisis: trust in American media has collapsed, leaving the ‘fourth estate’ a shadow of itself. What once seemed unthinkable—a president hostile to the press—now looks possible in Europe too.

The French Media Landscape

France serves as a case study for the peculiarities of the European media environment. The key difference is America’s decentralised, commercial market, with minimal state intervention. Audience ratings are thus paramount, making US media far more dynamic. In short, media companies must strive to keep pace with viewer preferences.

In Europe, the situation differs. Most European countries maintain state-owned television channels and subsidise various media outlets. France stands out in this regard. France abolished its €138 annual licence fee in 2022, which raised €3.2 billion, and replaced it with direct budgetary support. For 2025, €3.972 billion has been allocated to French public broadcasters.

Subsidies for Print Media and the Question of Plurality

This trend is even more pronounced in French print media. In 2024, the French Ministry of Culture allocated €175 million to support the sector, with €21.7 million directed to major newspapers to ensure ‘pluralism’. Yet the situation is paradoxical: most of these newspapers are owned by large business groups. This raises questions about pluralism, especially regarding perspectives on Ukraine, Covid-19, or Donald Trump. In newspapers receiving state subsidies for pluralism, such diversity is hard to find. Moreover, many of these outlets have embraced fact-checking to combat disinformation, which often stifles rather than fosters plural viewpoints. Fact-checking tends to focus on easily verifiable figures, but numbers alone do not constitute opinions. Interpreting data is key, and reducing complex realities to mere statistics can undermine truth and the very pluralism these media are meant to uphold. Unsurprisingly, readership of these newspapers has been declining steadily, as evidenced by data from 1945 to 2023.

(insert graph 1)

The Rise of Alternative Media

Across France, Europe, and even the US, alternative media are gaining ground, often challenging established narratives. They are steadily closing the gap with mainstream outlets in terms of audience share. In August, journalist Eric Morillot caused a stir with a post on X. His programme, ‘Les Incorrectibles’, invites guests based on their ideas rather than their access to traditional media. He often gives a platform to voices excluded from mainstream outlets. Drawing on his own experience as a former mainstream journalist, Morillot positions himself as a bridge between alternative and mainstream media. A recent post of his showed that on 15 August 2025, France’s top three programmes drew under six million viewers in a nation of 68.5 million. As Morillot wryly noted, traditional media no longer ‘pull’ as they once did.

(insert graph 2)

Alternative media exploit new technology, with AI set to accelerate the trend. Producing, editing, and translating content is now a matter of moments. The advantage once held by having large, well-resourced teams is becoming a liability. In the West, where labour is costly, large teams struggle against nimble alternative outlets, which are often run by individuals.

Alternative media also thrive by pushing boundaries. Podcasts and articles face few constraints beyond capturing and retaining audience attention. The longer format of such programmes increases the likelihood of a guest making a mistake, getting carried away, or saying something controversial—sparking a ‘buzz’ that spreads globally and boosts viewership.

However, alternative media are not a panacea. They often cater to the biases of their audiences, a tendency that is easily discernible. The very emphasis on the divide between mainstream and alternative media can distort perceptions. Even in traditional media, there are undoubtedly individuals committed to seeking truth and who are undeterred by obstacles.

European publishers, buoyed by state subsidies, have a longer lifeline than their American counterparts. But technology, shifting consumer habits, and eroding trust mean the decline of traditional media is inevitable. The only question is how quickly it will unfold.

Statement

Trump’s war on ‘fake news’ and France’s media subsidies expose a global crisis: declining trust in traditional outlets. America’s dynamic, ratings-driven media contrast with Europe’s stagnant, state-backed channels, while alternative media, fueled by AI, gain ground with bold content. Subsidised French newspapers, owned by business groups, struggle to deliver promised ‘pluralism’ on issues like Ukraine or Trump, and fact-checking often stifles diverse views. Technology, corporate control, and eroding trust are reshaping the media landscape, threatening mainstream outlets’ relevance with the rise of more nimble alternatives.

Weekly