Why journalism will need to count on “influencers”.

It may seem like an absurd statement, but the reality indicates that traditional journalism can no longer cope alone with the avalanche of data, facts, and events published on the internet. It is believed that, in a country such as Brazil, there are between three and ten million people classified as digital “influencers” (1 ) who produce news, while the official number of Brazilian journalists does not exceed one hundred thousand professionals (2).

FreePik/ CC

In the US, a 2024 study by the Keller Advisory Group reported a total of 27 million paid content creators , while the number of American journalists is currently estimated on 44,700 professionals, in a job market is expected to shrink by -10.1% between 2016 and 2026.(3)

These accountings, although imprecise, show how individuals without journalistic training have a much greater chance of witnessing newsworthy events than professional reporters and photographers. This is why the global trend of hard news being published by individuals without academic training in journalism is gaining more and more strength. (4)

It is the result of technological innovation that has given ordinary people the power to publish data, facts, events, and ideas directly on the internet without going through journalistic newsrooms. It is not a passing phenomenon but a structural transformation in contemporary society. This does not end journalism, which, in spite of losing its exclusivity in reporting harsh current events, gains new and transcendental functions such as investigating, contextualizing, and verifying data and facts published by ordinary people, including thousands who define themselves as digital “influencers.”

The Four Dilemmas of Journalism

The interdependence between professionals and so-called influencers is a complicated issue. First, because the term influencer implies that someone is influencing someone else, trying to induce an idea or vision of reality, or to sell a product or service. When the topic of interaction is news, the use of the expression influencer can generate the perception that there is a hidden interest in the publication of the fact, data, or event. We know that there is no absolute objectivity and impartiality in the practice of journalism, but it is essential to give the public the certainty that the professional seeks to be as realistic as possible.

The second dilemma involving the participation of ordinary people in the production of informative content is establishing a clear differentiation between those who seek to disseminate news that meets the needs and interests of the public, and individuals who use the internet for personal promotion, commerce, proselytizing, or to create disinformation through fake news. The differentiation has become a problem because online marketing favors the use of the expression “influencer.” The use of the expression “content producer” is beginning to gain visibility, but it has not yet taken off. That is why we are using the noun “influencer” in quotation marks to clarify the doubts regarding the definition of the activity in relation to news production.

The third and perhaps the biggest problem in addressing the relationship between journalism and ordinary people in the dissemination of news is the monetization of informative content produced by independents. As always happens when an innovation changes routines, rules and values, many individuals try to take advantage of the new situation to make money. The power to publish any information, combined with the ease of monetizing audiences offered by digital platforms, has generated a spectacular growth of amateur marketers who call themselves “influencers” (5). This has made it very difficult to distinguish those who publish data, thinking about the interest and needs of the public, from those who only aim to make money in a way that is not always ethical and legal.

Journalistic Mentoring

Since the practice of journalism in the digital age will imply some kind of relationship between professionals and “influencers,” it will be up to the former to develop parameters that allow them to identify, among individual producers of informative content, those who act prioritizing the public interest and those who are merely sellers of some product, service, or idea. It will not be an easy task, but it is already almost mandatory given the challenges currently faced by journalism and communication companies.

This leads to the fourth dilemma of the relationship between journalism and amateur production of informative content. Ordinary people are not prepared to deal with information in a highly complex context, such as that created by the avalanche of news, the dissemination of false data, disinformation, and the potentially lethal effects of information manipulation. It is up to journalism to play the role of mentor to the so-called ‘influencers’ in the production and dissemination of news. It is a new function that places journalism as part of a new social structure where the main task of reporters, editors and commentators is not to produce hard news but set up guidelines for how audiences will consume them.

— — —

(1) The Nielsen Institute estimated the number of “influencers” active on the Brazilian web at 10 million. The Influencer Marketing Benchmark Report 2025, however, says the total does not exceed 3.8 million, while a survey by the organizations Influency.me in partnership with Opinion Box states that the estimated number is only two million. The discrepancy in numbers is linked to different definitions used to characterize digital “influencers” (Information collected by the Gemini program).

(2) This data is from the National Federation of Journalists (FENAJ) and refers to all those who work with professional journalism. The entity, however, only has 40,000 members.

(3) More details at https://www.careerexplorer.com/careers/journalist

(4) The consulting firm Goldman Sachs estimates there are 67 million “influencers” worldwide, with a projected growth to 107 million by around 2030.

(5) A report by the company Market Research Future estimated the revenue of “influencers” worldwide at $92.5 billion.