Who Gets to Tell the Story Now? How Substack and Podcasts Changed the Media Gatekeeping Model 

By: Kezia Kent 

For a long time, storytelling power followed a predictable path. A small group of institutions decided which voices were worth amplifying, which narratives shaped public understanding and which perspectives stayed on the margins. 

That system still exists, but it no longer operates on its own. The center of gravity has moved, even if the old structures remain in place. 

A podcast interview sets the tone for a news cycle. A Substack post circulates among policymakers before a traditional outlet picks up the thread. A creator with a loyal audience can drive as much or more engagement as a mid-tier publication.  

This is less about replacement and more about expansion. The number of people who can publish, distribute and sustain attention has grown in a way that would have been difficult to imagine a decade ago. 

That growth shows up clearly in audience behavior. The Reuters Institute’s Digital News Report found that a large majority of podcast listeners say the format helps them understand issues more deeply, pointing to a clear appetite for content that goes beyond headlines and soundbites. 

That kind of engagement changes what storytelling looks like in practice. Podcasts create space for time, context and voice. Newsletters offer a similar advantage in written form, giving authors room to develop arguments and build direct relationships with readers without the required filter of an editor at a traditional news media outlet. That connection is not shaped by the same algorithms that determine what surfaces in feeds and “for you” pages, where visibility is still filtered through platform-driven gatekeeping. Rather, the appeal rests in proximity — the direct relationship audiences feel to journalists. 

At the same time, the broader media environment has become more fragmented. The same Reuters research points to declining engagement with traditional outlets alongside growing reliance on alternative platforms including podcasts and personality-driven content. 

That fragmentation has real implications for how stories move. A narrative might begin as a podcast conversation, circulate through social platforms and later land in a traditional outlet once it has already built momentum. The sequence has changed and so has the starting point. 

Trust plays a role here as well. More and more younger audiences are turning to individual creators and online personalities as news sources. Many place value on familiarity and consistency over institutional authority. 

That shift does not erase the influence of established media. Coverage in major outlets still shapes public discourse in ways that independent platforms often cannot. What has changed is how credibility is built and where it begins. It can emerge from a newsroom or develop through sustained engagement with an audience over time. 

For communications professionals, this creates a more complex set of decisions. Placement still matters but it no longer stands alone as the primary goal. The more relevant question is how a story is introduced, where it gains traction and how it evolves as it moves across platforms. 

Owned channels including podcasts and newsletters now play a larger role in that process. They offer continuity and allow organizations and individuals to stay in conversation with their audiences rather than appearing only when a story is picked up. That continuity can shape how future media coverage unfolds since journalists are increasingly sourcing from conversations that are already happening in public. 

The result is a media environment that feels more open and more crowded at the same time. More voices are participating, which expands the range of perspectives in circulation. That same expansion makes attention harder to earn and even harder to sustain. 

In this context, access is no longer the defining challenge. The ability to publish is widely available. What separates one story from another is clarity, relevance and the strength of the narrative itself. 

Podcasts and platforms like Substack have widened the field of who gets to tell stories. The question that follows is more demanding: who can hold attention long enough for those stories to matter? 

Stories for Storytellers: Why PR Professionals Should Read More Fiction

By: Isabella Zorich 

As PR professionals working in the nonprofit and advocacy space, we ask a lot of our audiences. We want them to care about people they may never meet, in communities they may never visit, facing crises they may never personally experience. That can be an enormous empathy leap.  

Fiction reading is repetition training for that leap. When we read novels, we find ourselves inside a character’s mind, separate from our own. We feel their fear on the witness stand, their shame after a grave mistake and their stubborn hope in the face of incomprehensible adversity. This practice mirrors the same cognitive move we ask of readers, journalists, donors and decision-makers every day. Psychologists call this “theory of mind”: the ability to infer the beliefs, intentions and emotions of another person, even when they’re very different from you.  

Studies show that when readers are emotionally transported into a fictional story, their empathy scores can measurably increase over time. Other research finds that people who often read fiction tend to do better on tests of social perception and perspective-taking than those who primarily read nonfiction. In other words, reading about imaginary people seems to sharpen our ability to read real ones. While this is a desirable quality in daily life, in advocacy, it is the work itself. 

How this manifests in practice 

Fiction reading enables us to identify characters, not just content. In other words, deciphering the who, not just the what. A great novel or story creates a world around a specific human being with a name, a backstory and conflicting motivations. The more we live with this kind of specificity on the page, the harder it becomes to reduce real people to their circumstances in our writing.  

Fiction also helps us identify and follow shifting perspectives. Literary fiction in particular often moves in and out of different points of view in the same scene. This is an idea called “polyphony” in literary theory, but in PR, this can map directly onto being able to hold a client’s anxiety, a reporter’s skepticism and a community member’s lived reality all at the same time. This awareness enables us to craft language that helps us anticipate questions and reactions instead of being blindsided by them.  

Fiction and the Importance of Narrative Framing 

In mission-driven advocacy and communications, narrative framing is essential to deciding which truths to foreground, which questions to pose and what emotional arc will help people see an issue clearly without oversimplifying it. Fiction is a training ground for this kind of intentional storytelling. Most great novels open with a moment. A slap in the face, a phone that won’t stop ringing, a character running late to an important meeting. Advocacy stories, too, work better when they start from a concrete scene, instead of beginning with abstract claims.  

Good fiction also sits with tension. It lets conflicting truths exist in the same space. For advocates working on complicated issues, tolerance for tension matters. The easiest frame is often “good versus bad,” but the framing that lasts typically includes greater honesty and nuance. 

Fiction as a Counterbalance to Speed 

PR and communications culture are inherently fast paced. We are tasked with rapidly responding to a twenty-four-hour news cycle. This reflex is valuable, but if everything in our professional and informational diets is fast and fragmented, it is easy to lose a feel for longer arcs that actually shift public conversations.  

Fiction pushes us in the opposite direction. In following a fictional narrative, we have to remember early details, keep track of threads and wait for slow payoffs. This is very close to what advocacy campaigns require. More than just trying to capture attention on a given day, we are trying to challenge what people think is normal, fair and possible. Reading longer, demanding stories can help us develop this ability in the midst of an environment that constantly pushes us toward quick wins. 

Final Thoughts

PR teams need not organize formal book clubs, but it is worth considering fiction reading as an important part of professional development. It is a valuable, quiet way that people in the field can sharpen their skills and set themselves apart.  

At our best, those of us who work in PR for advocacy do not exist solely to manufacture attention. We exist to help people see and feel what is already true. Fiction can be one of the most reliable ways to prepare for that responsibility.  

The AI Boom: What it Means for the Nonprofit World

By: Darwin Morales-Ortiz

Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing the way organizations across most industries operate – and nonprofits are no exception. As AI tools become more accessible, many nonprofits are finding ways to incorporate them into their work, from streamlining operations to enhancing communications. Now, with more than 80% of nonprofits reporting using AI to some degree, it’s important for organizations to understand both its potential and its limitations.
Ways AI Is Supporting Nonprofit Work

AI has the ability to build capacity. Platforms like ChatGPT can assist with tasks such as content creation, donor outreach and messaging. This support is especially valuable for organizations operating with limited budgets. 

Nonprofits can also benefit from AI’s ability to assist with grant writing by reviewing guidelines, checking eligibility requirements and drafting materials. Additionally, it can help generate ideas for fundraising events, allowing organizations to have more time to focus on their mission-driven work. Tools like Google Gemini are examples of platforms already supporting nonprofits with these tasks. 

Many organizations use AI for data analysis, including donor segmentation, streamlining reporting and automating data entry. According to Nonprofit Pro, 64% of nonprofits are “using AI to analyze end user data to understand their needs and pain points.”

The growing presence of AI is allowing organizations, especially smaller ones, to operate in a crowded sector, with DonorSearch reporting that 68% of nonprofits already use it for data analysis. By streamlining time-consuming tasks like content creation and data analysis, these tools help nonprofits work more effectively and focus on areas they consider most important. Access to this technology has the potential to create equal footing, allowing under-resourced nonprofits to compete with larger, better-funded organizations.

Challenges and Concerns Around AI Use

While AI can be a powerful tool, it also raises concerns around misinformation and credibility. According to the Columbia Journalism Review article, “AI Search Has A Citation Problem,” generative tools often provide users with inaccurate information since they don’t reject questions they are unable to answer. Further, these tools can sometimes fail to link back to original publishers or cite the wrong sources altogether. This not only contributes to the spread of misinformation, but it also has the potential to damage the reputation of the organizations relying on AI tools’ output. 

Beyond potential accuracy issues, AI tools may fail to capture an organization’s voice or use language that aligns with its values. Without careful oversight, AI tools can create language that feels generic and disconnected from the people nonprofits work to serve. The lack of a human touch can lead to challenges for nonprofits hoping to communicate with communities in an authentic, personal way that builds trust. 

Ethical considerations also come into play, from ensuring AI-generated content aligns with organizations’ missions and values to transparency regarding their use of AI. Despite these concerns, fewer than 10% of nonprofits have official policies around AI use, according to Nonprofit Quarterly. Establishing guidelines can help organizations implement AI into their work while preserving their integrity. 

While some see AI as a tool for greater efficiency, broader reach and funding competitiveness, others believe it raises concerns around trust and authenticity–especially in a sector built on relationships. As this technology evolves, nonprofits will need to work intentionally and responsibly when using AI to ensure it doesn’t weaken their connection to the communities they serve.

Final Thoughts

AI offers nonprofits opportunities to increase capacity and streamline tasks. From content creation to grant writing, smaller teams can use these tools to develop efficiency. However, AI is not without limitations. Misinformation, lack of personalization and ethical considerations mean that AI-generated content requires consistent, careful vetting and editing to ensure content is always accurate and authentic. With technology and proper oversight, organizations can use AI to their advantage while staying true to their mission and values.

Back to top