As history is rewritten and the digital landscape fuels misinformation, sociologist and journalist Molly Cotner dissects the modern media crisis—and what it means for the future of journalism.

Interview conducted by: Gökhan Çolak
Introduction written by: Tricia Chérie

The war on truth has become an all-out siege, with history under revision, censorship on the rise, and reality itself up for debate. What was once a slow erosion of facts has turned into outright demolition, where those in power rewrite the past, suppress dissent, and manipulate the present to serve their agenda. False information spreads six times faster than the truth on Twitter*, and with platforms like Facebook scaling back fact-checking, misinformation isn’t just thriving—it’s actively reshaping public perception.

Digital media—once celebrated as a great equalizer—is now at the heart of this crisis, spiraling into chaos. What began as a grassroots rebellion against print journalism’s gatekeepers has been commandeered by a handful of billionaires, turning online platforms into propaganda machines. These entities exploit political and social divisions, flooding users with flashy, misspelled memes and rage bait. Even some of the most reputable news outlets prioritize engagement over accuracy, distorting the truth to satisfy algorithms and corporate interests.

As the fight over truth intensifies, critical analysis has never been more urgent—something sociologist, journalist, and educator Molly Cotner has spent her career dissecting. A sociology professor in Colorado Springs, Cotner applies a sharp, critical lens to these issues, blending academic insight with journalistic expertise. In this conversation, she unpacks how the press is vilified, objectivity weaponized, and truth itself put at risk.

1. How has digital media reshaped journalism, and what are its biggest sociological impacts on journalists, new organizations, and audiences?

For news organizations, survival in the digital space depends on adapting to ever-changing revenue models. Traditional income streams have disappeared, replaced by algorithm-driven advertising, social media influence, and niche markets. This shift raises serious concerns about big tech’s unchecked influence in shaping public discourse and spreading misinformation. While misinformation refers to unintentionally false content, disinformation is the deliberate spread of falsehoods to mislead. Both thrive in an ecosystem where digital platforms prioritize engagement over accuracy and operate with little accountability.

For audiences, digital media has democratized access to diverse perspectives and empowered social movements. The rise of citizen journalism has challenged the traditional gatekeeping of news organizations and professional journalists. Historically marginalized stories now have a platform—an undeniable positive. But the same digital platforms have also fragmented audiences, fostering echo chambers that reinforce biases, stereotypes, ideologies, and socio-economic hierarchies. Information is often presented without requiring critical thinking or deeper investigation. This duality between opportunity and risk underscores the complexity of digital media in shaping how we engage with the world.

2. What ethical and sociological principles should guide journalists in the digital age?

As a sociologist, I focus on many things, but power is one of the biggest. Without getting too theoretical, there are several sociological principles that journalists should consider before publishing in the digital space.

First, journalists must recognize the dynamics between themselves, their audience, and their subjects. The power to shape public opinion—especially with the reach of digital platforms—should never be taken lightly. This responsibility is especially critical when reporting on historically marginalized communities, where misrepresentation has long fueled harmful narratives.

Representation and inclusivity should also be guiding frameworks. Journalists must ask themselves tough questions: Are diverse voices being heard? Are stories accurately reflecting the complexity of underrepresented groups? Ensuring a broad spectrum of perspectives prevents the perpetuation of stigma and incomplete narratives.

Accountability and accuracy are equally crucial. Digital media amplifies narratives rapidly, making fact-checking and responsible sourcing more essential than ever. Today’s headlines are often designed for clicks over substance, and oversimplification of stories distorts reality and limits opportunities for critical engagement. News organizations and journalists must challenge this trend, ensuring that both they and their audiences engage critically with the information they consume.

Finally, journalists must consider the potential for harm. How will this story impact individuals or communities? Traditional journalism has long clung to the idea of objectivity, but sociologists recognize that true objectivity is impossible. Power dynamics always shape narratives, particularly when institutional sources are prioritized in fast-paced reporting. The pursuit of so-called objectivity can sometimes obscure deeper truths or unintentionally reinforce existing power structures. Journalism must move beyond this rigid framework and acknowledge the social responsibility that comes with reporting in a digital age.

I believe digital media provides the opportunity to uphold all of these principles—but only if we engage with it intentionally and responsibly.

3. What ethical and sociological principles should guide journalists in the digital age?

The impacts are vast. Deliberate manipulation of information is, quite frankly, propaganda—designed to suppress critical thinking and discourage questioning. One of its core goals is to create confusion, spread falsehoods, and sow division. Division is particularly significant because it distracts from those who perpetuate manipulation, ultimately reinforcing systems of power and privilege.

Disinformation erodes trust—not just in the media, but in society’s institutions as a whole. When people distrust traditional sources, they are more likely to cling to ideas that confirm their existing beliefs while shutting out alternative perspectives. This stifles meaningful discourse, weakens community-building, and fuels polarization.

We’ve also seen how disinformation reinforces harmful narratives about vulnerable communities, often justifying systemic inequality and discrimination. Meanwhile, social media accelerates these issues, as the pressure to share and react instantly prioritizes speed over accuracy.

Disinformation thrives because digital platforms reward outrage and virality over nuance and fact-based reporting. When people encounter misleading narratives repeatedly, they become normalized—even when evidence contradicts them. This is one of the most dangerous social consequences of disinformation: it shapes beliefs, behaviors, and policy decisions, often with devastating real-world effects.

4. How do politicians and corporate entities manipulate the media, and what responsibility do journalists have in resisting propaganda?

Media has always been a tool of political propaganda. History is filled with examples of news, pop culture, and mass communication being wielded to reinforce ideology and control public behavior. Today’s digital world is no exception—if anything, it has amplified these tactics.

Billionaire media owners influence reporting, fact-checking, and even the narratives allowed on their platforms. Social media CEOs shape discourse by suppressing activist voices while allowing disinformation to flourish. Politicians attempt to censor opposition while simultaneously using digital platforms to spread their own manipulated narratives.

Journalists must be willing to challenge propaganda, even at personal or professional risk. That’s no small task, but truth-telling requires resisting pressure from those in power and ensuring transparency and accountability.

 Editor’s Note: Some responses have been condensed for clarity. For the full interview visit Our partner publication, PR Carnet World.

*Referred to now as X but much like fetch it’s just not going to happen.