There are only two basic ways to support journalism—subscriptions and advertising. But one of those methods, advertising, has been strangled by a “brand safety” movement that has told marketers they need to stay away from placing ads on large swaths of the best journalism around.
This brand safety movement has created a vicious downward cycle, in which news has to follow clicks or face virtual extinction by a hidden set of algorithms that strips news organizations of their ability to afford quality journalism. This comes on top of a general notion among chief marketing officers that avoiding news is good business.
Valuable news junkies
Actually, it isn’t good business. News junkies, who according to Stagwell research check news five or more times a day, are about 25% of the U.S. population, and many of them are college-educated, richer, and more tech-oriented. Indeed, 11% of the population are exclusive news junkies who don’t watch sports or entertainment, so news is the best—and even only—way to reach them effectively. In my tenure at Microsoft as executive vice president of advertising, I moved some of the company’s media buy to news sites. The ads there were some of the highest-performing revenue generators for the company.
At the 2025 World Economic Forum in Davos, Stagwell revealed new research that found global leaders are strong proponents of news and see it as a sound and strategic investment. 86% of executives said companies should advertise on news media, and 75% expressed a desire for their own companies to increase news advertising. Further, the executives agreed brand safety concerns are overblown, with 69% saying brand safety protocols are overapplied to the point of hurting media outlets and advertisers. The survey was fielded among over 1,000 CEOs and board directors in 14 countries.
The research follows two news advertising studies conducted by Stagwell as part of its Future of News initiative. The first study, conducted among 50,000 Americans and released in May 2024, found no difference in key brand metrics between ads next to gun shootings and war in the Middle East versus ads next to business, sports, and entertainment stories. It also showed that, as for the one in four Americans who are news junkies, as noted above, they read an average of seven news articles per day.
A boost to brands
Then, we proved brand safety concerns and news junkies are not only an American phenomena: Our second study—fielded among 22,000 respondents in the United Kingdom—showed 25% of Brits are news junkies; and our latest study, timed to the World Economic Forum in Davos, found 90% of CEOs and board directors are part of the news junkies group, too, reading an average of six articles a day.
Not only is news beneficial for business with ideal marketing audiences, but consumers view brands more favorably when they advertise in news. A flash poll conducted in November 2024 among over 1,500 U.S. adults found 65% of Americans said it’s important for companies to advertise in news, and 66% have a more positive perception of companies that do so. That means advertising in news actually helps the brand and reputation of a company.
If both global business leaders and consumers agree brands should advertise in news, why does news continue to suffer from a shortage of ad dollars? One driver lies in outdated, extensive blocklists that have been built up around news. Incorrect keyword blocking cost U.S. publishers $2.8 billion in 2019. Our latest study shows 84% of global executives say their organizations apply brand safety protocols, but 57% think it is a mistake to apply blanket brand safety across all news outlets and types of news content. Another obstacle is that actors with political motives—like the now-disbanded Global Alliance for Responsible Media, as alleged by X owner Elon Musk—have taken steps to institutionalize brand safety fears and suppress freedom of speech.
The consequences of brand safety fearmongering are devastating: Brands pull ads from news; declining revenue forces newsrooms to cut costs, lay off journalists, or shut down entirely; journalism becomes saturated with clickbait because newsrooms are unable to cover critical stories; and misinformation spreads. Already newsrooms are shuttering at a rate of more than two per week on average, and newspapers have lost 77% of jobs since 2005—the single steepest plunge amongst 532 industries ranked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Ending news advertising bans
CEOs and board directors recognize the consequences of this vicious cycle: 83% of executives say news media raises awareness of critical issues, 81% say news can positively influence society, and 79% agree news is critical to democracy. The consensus is clear: Refusing to advertise on news disables a critical tool for democracy to survive.
CEOs should make supporting news both good business and good social responsibility now. They should check in with their CMOs and verify there is no blanket ban on news advertising at their company, and, if there is, end it. They should pull back from overzealous brand safety regimes and at least test news audiences for their products. This is how we can turn that vicious cycle into a virtuous one—reaching new audiences while helping fill the world with quality journalism.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
Read more:
- Meet the 20th-century media tycoon who would have parried Trump’s isolationist thrust—and not cowered in fear of retaliation
- Can this tech billionaire save the media from an AI apocalypse?
- The legacy media is dead. Long live the legacy media
