There are many common misconceptions about media monitoring that need to be cleared up sooner rather than later to give your brand the best chance of positive PR. Rather than letting your company succumb to the myths and misinformation being spread around, here are three of the most prevalent misunderstandings and the fact behind the fiction:
There’s more to media monitoring than the digital platforms.
Myth #1 – You only need digital
While digital platforms are becoming more important to media monitoring, this is by no means the only area you need to be covering. Tweets, online newspapers and blogs are of course crucial, but so too are traditional media options, like local newspapers, talkback radio and other offline sources.
In fact, the best way to approach your media monitoring strategy is to accept that digital and traditional media are commonly connected, rather than separate features. For instance, social is often used as an extension to broadcast offerings, according to a study from Nielsen.
Here at Isentia, we understand that all platforms are important. No matter how small.
Myth #2 – Only the big publications matter
For many companies, getting the brand name or products mentioned on a national radio show or published in a country-wide newspaper can mean a big break. Alternatively, a negative story across these major platforms could result in a significant blow to your reputation and profitability.
It is clear, then, that keeping tabs on the big media players is crucial. However, while some media monitoring providers will focus on national newspapers, big brand radio shows and other major publications, these strategies could be missing an important element.
National publications can give you a clear picture of what millions of consumers are reading, thinking and discussing, but this is unlikely to give you much information on what the local people believe.
If your business operates in a rural or remote location, you need to be tracking the local publications.
If your business operates in a rural or remote location, you need to be tracking the local publications – no matter how small. Similarly, even newspapers circulating in smaller parts of big cities can provide a significant level of insight, if only you are aware of their readership and content.
Myth #3 – Listening is the most important part
While media monitoring is critical for business success, listening to the conversations about your brand and industry is far from the be-all and end-all to your strategies.
Once you have uncovered a relevant story or discussion, it’s not enough to simply stand idly by and learn from the experience. Taking the next step involves getting an insightful and useable report, deciding on relevant and effective action and getting involved in the discussions.
Of course, this is all easier said than done, but with the right media monitoring tools, you can get started with your best foot forward. Click here to check out some of our services so that you can be on the right track!
Loren is an experienced marketing professional who translates data and insights using Isentia solutions into trends and research, bringing clients closer to the benefits of audience intelligence. Loren thrives on introducing the groundbreaking ways in which data and insights can help a brand or organisation, enabling them to exceed their strategic objectives and goals.
This report aims provides insight into the Banking Industry in Vietnam. We look into people's preferences into their customer experience; using either traditional or digital banks, we deep dive into the topics driving social conversations about the banking industry, and the top mentioned brands related to the banking industry in Vietnam.
We have explored the latest trends and unpacked the current situation faced by the digital banking industry in Vietnam.
A look into the changing consumption of news, and believability
It’s not a new statement to say we’ve shifted the way we consume or engage with news. However, it’s often forgotten that this shift isn’t occurring at a ‘moment in time’, it continues. While whether we click, scroll or turn a page, how we choose to consume our media is also more interesting when considering how this changes the behaviors or trust surrounding this activity.
‘When we are no longer able to change a situation- we are challenged to change ourselves ‘– Viktor E. Frankl
Much like the saying ‘you are what you read’, is our chosen method of consumption a reflection of our identity and which does our level trust in what we read, depend on the format.
While it may be easy to image an older generation still pouring over the news within a double page spread, every generation is playing its part in this shift. Looking at Australia specifically, the younger generation is still driving the most change but is this perhaps only a result of never relying on ‘one’ channel for news.
We look into how the landscape has changed, and what else can be unearthed.
Key findings in the shift of the media landscape
The growth of stories format and the shift to online videos, audios, images and live streams
Digital rival’s TV for news consumption
Social media has replaced ‘serious news’ with the trending, the viral and the buzzworthy
The news cycle is now 24/7
There has been a significant increase in fake news and a shift in the amount of trust people have in news
Australians get their news from the following sources:
Facebook 41%
FB Messenger 11%
WhatsApp 10%
Instagram 9%
Snapchat 5%
6 out of 10 New Zealanders read news content online and audiences spend almost 3 hours per watching broadcast TV
Trending news
With unlimited access to news and a 24/7 news cycle, people have to find a way to process the information. News happens instantaneously now and what happens today is often forgotten tomorrow. In the world of social media, most scroll through their newsfeed and only stop to look at topics and buzzworthy or trending stories that are relevant to their current situation. Not only that, watching short video clips that provide main headlines and brief conclusions are on the rise.
Fake news
A recent study conducted by the News and Media Research Centre revealed that 73% of Australian news consumers have experience a range of fake news including:
Poor journalism (40%).
Politically or commercially fabricated news (25%)
Stories pushing a political agenda (38%);
Advertorial (33%);
Satire (25%); and
The use of the term ‘fake news’ to discredit the media (37%)
Those who mainly use online news as their news source were more susceptible to encountering fake news compared to print and TV and as a result, their trust in the news has diminished.
The number of stories labelled ‘fake news’ seems to be increasing almost as quickly as our concern about it. The term has been used for everything from hoaxes and satire, to contentious articles, and genuinely false information. After a data search was conducted for the number of fake news mentions across broadcast, press and online across ANZ, it was discovered Australia had a significantly higher mention rate over a 6-month period in comparison to New Zealand especially across broadcast. Over November, December and January we saw a large spike in fake news mentions across the ANZ region, especially across online - this could be as a result of Facebook being in the spotlight around fake news stories on their platform and several inquests happening during this time.
With this data it can be assumed that with so much fake news being reported, our trust in news will be affected.
Trust in news
'Trust in the news is up — but there's still only a 50-50 chance you'll trust me on that', ABC News Online
The trust in news on social media remains low however trust is highest in established news brands, public broadcasters and print newspapers. Consumers seek quality, credibility and reputation when seeking out the news and albeit its use has been declining since 2016, television is still the most popular platform for news consumption. Although there is mistrust, consumption of news on social media is very much on the rise and although there has been a steady hold with the decline in traditional formats, it could be considered ‘a new balancing act’ as it becomes the norm for digital news consumption behaviours to coexist alongside more traditional means.
Shift in demographics
A study conducted by Western Sydney University outlines younger Australians are the ones driving change in terms of news consumption and below are some interesting facts from the study:
YouTube is their preferred social media platform (37 per cent), Facebook (15 per cent) Instagram (10 per cent) and Snapchat (6 per cent)
They do not trust news organisations and are not reading print newspapers
They engage with news stories as it makes them feel happy and motivated and knowledgeable
They think news organisations don’t understand young people’s lives and don’t cover the issues that matter to them.
Social media is a popular news source, but they are not confident about spotting fake news online
Paywalls
Trust leads to payment for news and those who pay for print newspapers or online news sources are much more likely to trust news than people who don’t pay for it. Australians remain overwhelmingly reluctant to pay for online news as there is so much information readily available for free. But when they do pay, they expect more than just the headlines – with trust in the brand and in-depth news analysis being the primary reasons that they would be willing to pay. Interestingly, although print runs are decreasing, their overall readership is not. The combined print and online readership of newspapers has been growing steadily over the past few years. One of the main reasons for the increased discussions around paywalls are due to businesses having a loss in net profit. As a result of this, businesses are introducing an online paywall, to “win back” their lost net profit. After some analysis, we found mentions around paywall to be increasing month on month in New Zealand as it is becoming more of a topical conversation in the land of the long white cloud. Comparatively, Australia are also discussing paywall however the more prominent conversations were earlier this year (February and March) and have been declining since. Could paywalls and digital subscription services be the future of receiving online content and news?
"
["post_title"]=>
string(39) "How to keep the pace in the digital age"
["post_excerpt"]=>
string(63) "A look into the changing consumption of news, and believability"
["post_status"]=>
string(7) "publish"
["comment_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["ping_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["post_password"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_name"]=>
string(31) "keeping-pace-in-the-digital-age"
["to_ping"]=>
string(0) ""
["pinged"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_modified"]=>
string(19) "2020-11-17 00:25:21"
["post_modified_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2020-11-17 00:25:21"
["post_content_filtered"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_parent"]=>
int(0)
["guid"]=>
string(36) "https://isentia.wpengine.com/?p=1775"
["menu_order"]=>
int(0)
["post_type"]=>
string(4) "post"
["post_mime_type"]=>
string(0) ""
["comment_count"]=>
string(1) "0"
["filter"]=>
string(3) "raw"
}
Blog
How to keep the pace in the digital age
A look into the changing consumption of news, and believability
I crowd-sourced some opinions on ‘how PR has evolved’ via Facebook before this article was penned, and ‘chaotically’, ‘always-on’, ‘unpredictably’ and ‘intense’ were among some of the top keywords surfaced. Exactly how fast is the news-making cycle today? I’ve experienced it first-hand a couple of weeks ago.
By 11 am on the same day, three interview requests had arrived via Facebook Messenger from three different publications. By 2 pm, all interviews were completed on WhatsApp and my name appeared in the papers on the very next day. The whole event took place in less than 24 hours.
This is a glimpse of how news is made in this day and age. Journalists today are online and on social media; they are following key opinion leaders (KOLs) to get opinions. Gone are the days when they relied solely on press releases and spokesperson soundbites to write news and when public opinion was easier to gauge as people were only accessing a handful of mediums to receive information.
The convergence of digital, social and mobile has added layers of complexity in PR and clearly disrupted the practice, as news today becomes 24×7 and travels across the globe at the speed of the internet. The infamous United Airline incident for example, although happened in Chicago, created an uproar and boycott in China and trended in the top news on Weibo, all because of the power of social media.
The rise of digital and social certainly has benefited PR by creating the direct relationships with people, rather than requiring a media filter. To fully unleash its benefits, the best PR talents should strike the balance between creating content that people actually want to read, listen to or watch, and providing what traditional journalism would consider “news.”
With a good piece of content and story at the core, PR professionals are required to have the ability to navigate an increasingly complex media environment and to embrace the beauty of digital and social to enhance storytelling.
Instead of issuing a formal corporate announcement, why not consider tapping on Facebook Live for product launches and public activations? OCBC Bank recently launched its Stay True campaign via Facebook Live, where the bank’s Head of Consumer Financial Services was put through a lie detector test. The video garnered over 200,000 view to date.
Another example of leveraging digital to innovate traditional PR approach is a revamp of online corporate newsrooms. Dynamic Newsroom is a mash-up of PR, content and digital, which is designed to drive engagement, not simply overload information. It takes the best of everything we know about media relations and hosting content online, to more effectively connect brands with journalists.
Having talked about the benefits and opportunities, I also would like to caution that this trend of digital and social convergence also poses certain threats.
As social media increasingly becomes a main source of news and information and due to the fact that most social media content is user-generated, in order to boost visibility and garner likes and shares, brands and citizen journalists have been noticed to use unethical techniques to make their content exciting or ‘viral’. Such fake news and clickbait headlines are detrimental to brand reputation and consumer trust.
With great power comes great responsibility. The ability to earn credibility becomes even more important in an era of round-the-clock marketing messages. PR is becoming even more important and relevant than ever as the most reliable voice.
"
["post_title"]=>
string(70) "The relevance of PR in the age of digital, social & citizen journalism"
["post_excerpt"]=>
string(331) "I crowd-sourced some opinions on ‘how PR has evolved’ via Facebook before this article was penned, and ‘chaotically’, ‘always-on’, ‘unpredictably’ and ‘intense’ were among some of the top keywords surfaced. Exactly how fast is the news-making cycle today? I’ve experienced it first-hand a couple of weeks ago."
["post_status"]=>
string(7) "publish"
["comment_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["ping_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["post_password"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_name"]=>
string(67) "the-relevance-of-pr-in-the-age-of-digital-social-citizen-journalism"
["to_ping"]=>
string(0) ""
["pinged"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_modified"]=>
string(19) "2019-06-26 04:20:45"
["post_modified_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2019-06-26 04:20:45"
["post_content_filtered"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_parent"]=>
int(0)
["guid"]=>
string(36) "https://isentia.wpengine.com/?p=1592"
["menu_order"]=>
int(0)
["post_type"]=>
string(4) "post"
["post_mime_type"]=>
string(0) ""
["comment_count"]=>
string(1) "0"
["filter"]=>
string(3) "raw"
}
Blog
The relevance of PR in the age of digital, social & citizen journalism
I crowd-sourced some opinions on ‘how PR has evolved’ via Facebook before this article was penned, and ‘chaotically’, ‘always-on’, ‘unpredictably’ and ‘intense’ were among some of the top keywords surfaced. Exactly how fast is the news-making cycle today? I’ve experienced it first-hand a couple of weeks ago.
If you ask ChatGPT or Gemini about your organisation today, the answer won't come straight from your website. Instead, it uses sources the model already trusts, which are often months or years old. So if your last big mention was a crisis or a controversy from 2023, that's probably still how AI describes you.
This is the tough reality for anyone working in PR and communications today. More people are getting their first—and sometimes only—impression of your organisation from an AI-generated summary, not from search results or the homepage. And these summaries often rely on outdated information.
What does freshness actually mean?
Content freshness refers to how recent the sources are that an AI model uses when it talks about you. It might seem like a minor technical point, but it's actually very important.
Search engines have always valued fresh content, and they let you update information quickly. If you change a page, Google recrawls it, and rankings can shift in days. Large language models don't work like this. As Lisa Main, Director at Main Bureau, said on Isentia's "AI as a Stakeholder" panel, "large language models are not databases of verified facts." These models are trained on a snapshot of the internet, updated only from time to time, and they rely on sources that were already prominent when they were trained. This means a past crisis or a controversy that is already resolved can keep showing up in AI answers long after it's no longer relevant.
She shared the example of how a day and a half after a notorious terror attack, she asked ChatGPT if the area had ever experienced a tragedy of that type. It replied that it had not." The model wasn't being careless, but it just hadn't updated to include the latest news. This gap between what reality is and what AI still believes is true sums up the content freshness problem.
Dr Nici Sweaney, founder of AI Her Way, explained on the same panel why this gap matters. She calls AI "an accidental narrator" — it shapes what people believe about your organisation just by repeating the latest information it received. The system simply uses what's available and is not trying to be harmful, so it's important to make sure that information is up to date.
How does this change the way organisations show up?
For PR and communications teams, this changes what "reputation management" means. Put simply, messaging that an LLM cites will remain relevant, no matter when it dates from. Messaging that has not been factored into the LLM’s answers, meanwhile, will have no discernible impact on an increasingly vital - even central - channel, regardless of how many other metrics it might win out on.
This leads to two important things to consider:
First, the conditions that surround recent earned media, statements, and announcements determine whether an AI model updates its picture of the brand, or keeps running on an outdated one. Catherine Arrow of the PR Knowledge Hub made a related point on the "Inside the AI Shift" webinar: LLMs and the agents built on them are "often forbidden from going behind paywalls, from scraping particular sites," which she said creates a kind of "news vacuum." The same logic applies to the brand’s own newsroom or press page. If it isn't feeding the model something current, the model has nothing current to draw from.
Second, owned content—like blog posts, media releases, and website pages — are strategically important because they’re something the organisation in question can control , but only if they are updated. If a page hasn't changed in eighteen months, it's much more likely to disappear from AI results, making any reputation built on it unstable. If something is published once and not updated, the brand risks letting older, less positive stories take its place.
For public sector and government communicators, the stakes are more immediate again. When a government agency's guidance changes, whether that's eligibility criteria, compliance requirements, or a service update, and the fresh version doesn't make it into what AI models are citing, people will still get fed old information, with potentially devastating real-world implications.
The evidence is already there
This is not just in theory. It's playing out in global research and in the day-to-day data right now.
AI is quietly replacing the front door to your content
The Reuters Institute's Digital News Report Australia 2026 confirms that many PR teams have noticed that Google organic search traffic to news sites dropped by a third worldwide between November 2024 and November 2025, and by 38% in the US, as AI Overviews and AI Mode launched. Publishers expect this traffic to nearly halve again in the next three years. Some now call this trend a move towards "Google Zero." For communications teams, this means people are increasingly less likely to click through to your website to check if information is current. More often, they're trusting what the AI says: hence why it’s so important to monitor content freshness.
AI models are now web-enabled and they might not actually guarantee source accuracy
One challenge is that most major chatbots are now web-enabled. For example, ChatGPT can browse the internet, Gemini uses Google Search, and Perplexity has its own live index. This makes it easy to assume that AI always knows the latest information. However, this does not mean that they are always accurate when it comes to citations. A study from Columbia's Tow Center for Digital Journalism tested eight AI search tools with 1,600 queries. They found that these tools failed to correctly identify or cite the source article more than 60% of the time. Some tools were wrong on most tests and rarely showed any uncertainty. New information has not had time to be checked or confirmed like older stories have. This is the real risk of relying on the newest updates — a story that is fast moving and poorly sourced about your organisation might end up in an AI answer before it’s even verified or fact-checked.
People are turning to AI chatbots specifically for what's new
The same report found that 35% of people who use AI chatbots for news do so to get the latest media updates. Dr Sora Park from the University of Canberra's News and Media Research Centre explained on the "Digital News Report Australia 2026" webinar that the main reason people use AI chatbots for news is that "AI collates stories from different news sources into a single response." People expect these tools to provide current information. If your organisation's newest content isn't included (and you have something current or novel to communicate) you miss the chance to reach audiences when they're most interested.
Fresh content doesn’t always equate to ‘new’ content
A notable example of creating freshness that LLMs reward and prioritise comes from updating existing pages, rather from creating brand-new content. Republishing and refreshing current material is more effective than many communications teams realise, as long as one actually updates the content, not just the date.
Evergreen pages are the first casualties when AI overviews roll in
The DNR Australia 2026 report also notes that once someone is inside an AI chatbot conversation, they rarely leave it to check the source — only 4% of AI chatbot users say they always or often click through to the original article, compared with 19% for search and 17% for social media. The pages that used to earn traffic just by sitting there, permanent and useful, are now the ones most likely to lose visibility, because AI models favour what's recent over what's merely correct.
One fresh statement doesn't automatically undo a stale narrative
If an executive online, especially one who has a lot of weight to what they post online, says something controversial and it quickly spreads across media articles, social media and search — it will definitely be picked up by AI as well. There is a golden window of opportunity that they need to capitalise on to clarify what they said. If they don’t, the negative story that was already built into the data AI models use, will not be affected much by the executive’s clarification statement, which wasn’t that timely anyway. As Catherine Arrow of the PR Knowledge Hub said on the "Inside the AI Shift" webinar: "public relations and media relations are not the same thing," and relying on a single release misses the point. The real lesson is not to publish faster after a crisis, but to build a strong, up-to-date presence before you need it. In our latest report, “How can leaders communicate in an age of scrutiny”, we’ve outlined exactly how comms leaders can communicate by adapting their content to audiences exposed to the “AI way” of news dissemination.
What PR & Comms teams should actually do?
The challenge is that organisations can't make an AI model update its answers whenever they want. What they can do is track whether recent work is actually being noticed, which is what Lumina AI View can help with.
Lumina AI View monitors which sources AI models use when talking about your organisation, how strong and recent those sources are, and how you compare to competitors. Freshness is one of five key factors in the overall score. If your freshness score drops, it's an early warning that your latest campaign or announcement hasn't reached the AI ecosystem yet, and older stories are still dominating.
What’s important to note is that the tool provides a list of source citations, paired with reputation pillars like direction, integrity, performance and innovation — giving a comms professional a fully-rounded understanding of what they need to do. It’s not just the case of knowing source citations, but also of understanding your own AI perception and performance to make informed decisions — whether that’s for a brand,a government agency, a NFP or elsewhere.
This kind of tracking is even more important because it shifts by industry and by market, so "AI visibility" doesn't mean the same monitoring job for every organisation. AI answers for healthcare might draw from the smallest, highest-trust pool of sources (mostly clinical and government), but SaaS and fintech answers lean heavily on editorial reviews and comparison sites. Ngaire Crawford made a similar point regionally on the "AI as a Stakeholder" panel. For the APAC region specifically, she pushed back on the assumption that editorial media dominates AI citations — "there are a lot of really massive claims about the impact of editorial media... some as high as 85, 88%. That's not what we're seeing." Instead, she found "a fairly even split between (editorial media) and company content," alongside a real presence for review sites, forums, and academic sources. For a comms team, that means the freshness strategy that works for a media-heavy consumer brand might not work for a government agency whose AI visibility is really riding on review sites, .gov pages, or industry forums instead.
By tracking regularly — weekly or as a routine check— you turn the vague concern of "what is AI saying about us" into something that is super clear. You can see if recent coverage changed your list of citations, or if your owned content is still being found, or where there are gaps that need to be filled because old stories still exist and are causing problems.
The opportunity in staying current
There's a real advantage here too. If old content keeps you tied to an outdated story, fresh content is a direct way for PR and communications teams to influence how AI presents them. Publishing regularly, keeping your own pages updated, and getting recent, credible coverage is not just for human audiences. It's how PR professionals can make sure the systems shaping first impressions have the right information.
Teams that make it an ongoing habit of checking in regularly, watching for changes, and keeping fresh, credible content flowing, will have more control over how AI describes their organisation.
If you would like to know more about our Lumina suite, please reach out here and our team will get in touch with for you a quick demo.
"
["post_title"]=>
string(60) "Why is content freshness the new currency for AI visibility?"
["post_excerpt"]=>
string(172) "AI summaries are replacing websites as your organisation's first impression. Here’s why content freshness—and the sources feeding these models—matters more than ever."
["post_status"]=>
string(7) "publish"
["comment_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["ping_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["post_password"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_name"]=>
string(59) "why-is-content-freshness-the-new-currency-for-ai-visibility"
["to_ping"]=>
string(0) ""
["pinged"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_modified"]=>
string(19) "2026-08-20 02:44:18"
["post_modified_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2026-08-20 02:44:18"
["post_content_filtered"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_parent"]=>
int(0)
["guid"]=>
string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=49408"
["menu_order"]=>
int(0)
["post_type"]=>
string(4) "post"
["post_mime_type"]=>
string(0) ""
["comment_count"]=>
string(1) "0"
["filter"]=>
string(3) "raw"
}
Blog
Why is content freshness the new currency for AI visibility?
AI summaries are replacing websites as your organisation’s first impression. Here’s why content freshness—and the sources feeding these models—matters more than ever.
