Liesbeth Nizet’s job title is a first – at Mediahuis and presumably elsewhere: She works as Head of Future Audiences Monetization. In this context she oversaw the launch of Spilnews, a brand designed for young news consumers. Mediahuis operates out of Belgium and the Netherlands and owns an array of European media brands, among others the “Irish Independent” and the “Aachener Zeitung” ( Germany). We interviewed Liesbeth for our study on Gen Z and News, commissioned by Wiener Zeitung Media Group.
Liesbeth, you are Head of Future Audiences Monetization at Mediahuis, a pioneering role created to explore and validate opportunities for engaging young people with news. Why was that needed?
Liesbeth Nizet: Our organization has a long tradition of bringing people to our platforms and monetizing them there. But now a whole world of news is created outside on third-party-platforms. It was important to raise awareness, but also to force concrete choices about how we engage and monetize audiences beyond our owned platforms. It’s an and-and story, we need to make sure Mediahuis is also part of that next generation journalism, next to the loyal subscribers on our platforms.
How would you define that: next generation journalism?
Young people often don’t feel represented by traditional newspapers. News creators for example are much better at establishing that connection. Our newsrooms needed to understand that it is not enough to create something that is relevant for society, but if we want to reach younger people, it also needs to be relevant for the audiences they are creating it for. That requires different formats, different voices, and different success metrics.
You created SPILNEWS, a brand by young people for young people that is serving audiences on social media platforms, namely TikTok and Instagram. What made you do this?
Developing formats for young people that fit all our brands didn’t work out, because every brand has its tone of voice and its way to look at who it wants to be for younger audiences. In 2025 we made the strategic choice to create journalism with a focus on Gen Z, the 18- to 24-year-olds. Gen Z is the most rebellious generation, more so than Millennials and the Alpha Generation. They really know what they want, and they want authenticity, they don’t like compromises. If you put only a few Gen Zs into an existing newsroom, they leave or they will take over the existing routines. That’s why we built a separate team, with a clear mandate to learn fast and structurally feed insights back into the organisation.
How is SPILNEWS different from the other journalism your brands produce?
For one, everyone who works for SPILNEWS is younger than 25. The topics they are covering are automatically relevant to them. In traditional newsrooms editors tend to say, ‘Let’s look at TikTok for trends that are interesting to younger people.’ But that means they are writing about young audiences not from their perspective. SPILNEWS is not about making content that is youngish or cool or short. It is about designing journalism that fits how younger audiences actually consume, trust and value information. And it’s about representation. For example, we did something about financial fitness. That’s super interesting to young people. But if it’s primarily about topics that would meet the needs of many of our (older) subscribers – second home ownership and such –, we lose them. You cannot be everything for everyone, and trying to be is one of the biggest risks for relevance. We did focus groups to find out how to be relevant for this group.
What did the participants tell you?
Three things stood out: First, they told us, when they looked at traditional news brands, they didn’t feel like they belonged there. Second, they said if there was something bad happening, they wanted to know it but didn’t want to just hang in there, they wanted to find out how to be part of the solution. The third and in my opinion most relevant thing was, they said that they know that with TikTok they are exposed to only one side of the story. But they explicitly wanted to have different perspectives to be able to form their own opinions.
We keep hearing young people explicitly appreciate a point of view.
What we see is that they appreciate different perspectives, like from someone who lives in the countryside versus someone who lives in a city, a student or a working young person, etc. Today all of the creator-journalists in the SPILNEWS team represent different perspectives, focusing on their topics and interests. We have someone who works on politics, he’s looking at party programs and their effects on younger people and discusses this with politicians. Someone else is super interested in technology. She discovered that when you are on Vinted – the second-hand clothing platform popular among youngsters – you are able to buy weapons there when using certain keywords. She actually tried it and then went to the police with it. Another person works on inequality and justice and someone else covers human interest stuff, for example, what you do to prevent a hangover. And we work with creators, like the 20-year-old journalism student who has a disability. He is making videos for us on how it is to be young and face all these hurdles.
Many publishers have experimented with youth brands, most failed to attract sizeable audiences. What have your experiences been?
Thanks to SPILNEWS we are able to learn so much for our traditional brands. For example, the way we work with creators or with advertisers. We have adopted it for some of our regional brands, and it is super relevant. We have people in our traditional newsrooms who started their own TikTok accounts – I would have never thought that these individuals would. And that starts a movement showing our staff what journalism can be beyond the established routes.
It is more about learning than about commercial results then.
Learning is the primary goal in this phase but always with a clear view on monetization logic. For example, we started with branded content. We work with creators who bring stories that appeal to young people, like a campaign paid for by the government about healthy eating, featuring a hockey player who presented all the snacks he consumed during the day.
Many including most of our interview partners say young people cannot be monetized.
First, younger people and advertisers can be a match if you do it the right way. And second, from a subscription perspective, it’s important to show young people what journalism is because only that will get them to subscribe with other brands at some point in their lives, it is a long-term investment. So you cannot just ignore them. We know that the willingness to pay for news is low with young people. But on the other hand if you see what they are paying for – Netflix and the like – it is a call for us to reflect on why they pay for something. Creating a sense of belonging is super important. You need to inspire them and get them excited. They might take on some kind of membership, but only if it feels like entering a community, not just for access as a transactional relationship.
Do you approach all young people alike, or do you segment young audiences?
The needs of young audiences differ depending on their life stages and their interests, of course. Some might be working students, other young parents. You need to be aware of that and make sure that your newsroom is diverse enough. We analyse the data we get from the platforms and then we adjust.
If you were advising editors in chief from a traditional newsroom: What would be your top three recommendations?
The first one would be: meet your audiences where they are with your journalism, not with the recommendation ‘download our app’ or a marketing message. Show them what journalism for young people looks like. I’m pretty sure that when you make them feel they count, you will have the chance to interact with them. Representation matters. My second advice would be to follow the way the platforms are working. It’s – unfortunately – not on us to decide what a great video looks like on TikTok, you have to adjust to their rules. And third, invest in voices, because people follow people a lot more than brands.
How will AI change all these dynamics, since young people are flocking to AI tools?
AI is a great enabler for efficiency, for summarizing, maybe also for discovering blind spots at some points. But I think it will force us to do what journalism is meant to be for, that is going to the streets looking for stories. What really matters for younger generations is authenticity. They will appreciate the convenience of AI. But human curiosity, the art of finding and telling stories is something really human, and I don’t think that it will be replaced by machines on the short term.
What has surprised you most in your work with younger people?
What surprised me most is that we often think younger people are not interested in news. And when young people tell you that they don’t feel they belong in your news brand, that is an invitation, not a critique. They want your content, your stories but in a way that fits them and their way of life. When it comes to the newsroom, young journalists are interested in so many things, full of ideas, energy and good vibes, but they need some good leadership from our side. We need to channel that to make them grow and to make our journalism grow.
This interview was conducted as part of the study titled “A miss is as good as a mile: A qualitative study on Gen Z and journalism in Austria, featuring perspectives from users, media professionals, and international experts”, conducted for Wiener Zeitung Media Group by Jana Koch and myself. You can find more information and the full study here.
MUNICH – When a local radio station in Charlotte, North Carolina started a podcasting competition in its community, it was prepared for many contingencies, except one: that the response would overwhelm the station’s server. The initiative was aimed at increasing on-air diversity, and tens of thousands of people wanted in. Groups and individuals from all walks of life submitted more than 370 ideas for podcasts, and 33,000 listeners logged on to vote for them. What started as a one-time experiment will now be a regular feature.
Journalism has always suffered from a lack of diversity. Demographically uniform newsrooms have been producing uniformly homogeneous content for decades. And while editors around the world have increasingly recognized that this is a problem, too little has been done to address it.
One reason, ironically, is a preoccupation with digital change. “There has been so much focus on digital transformation in recent years, the question of diversity has had to stand aside,” explains Olle Zachrison of the Swedish public broadcaster Sveriges Radio, in a study comparing diversity efforts in the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany. And yet, as the newsroom in Charlotte discovered, diversity is not just an added bonus; it is at the very core of audience engagement today.
In explaining the business ethos of the digital age, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos has argued that it is all about “customer obsession as opposed to competitor obsession.” For the media, then, the guiding principle should be “audience first.” And that means using data to understand and cater better to it.
Not long ago, editorial choices were guided mostly by gut feelings and assumptions, whereas now they are often informed by analytical metrics and revealed truths about audience behavior. Some of these revelations are uncomfortable. Editors can no longer fool themselves about their journalism’s real-world impact. They now know that even the best stories tend to reach just a fraction of their hoped-for audience.
Complicating matters further, newsrooms have discovered that demand can peak at times when they have no new offerings, or when what they’re serving is not what consumers are seeking. In surveys like the Digital News Report, respondents often complain that the media offer too much negativity and volume, and too little explanation and relevant coverage.
Before digitalization, journalists didn’t have to think about their audiences as much as they do now. Newspapers were money-printing machines – the advertising dollars poured in regardless of what would now be called “content.” Likewise, public-service media faced almost no competition. But now that digital information is a commodity, with a few major platforms controlling its distribution, audience loyalty has become a matter of survival.
Many newsrooms were entirely unprepared for this new reality. They don’t even know who their potential new customers are, let alone how to reach them and win their trust. The problem is not just that newsroom homogeneity results in an incomplete view of the world and of the reading/listening public. It is that even when “outsiders” do land a job in this kind of environment, they tend to adapt to the dominant culture rather than challenge it. As a result, newsrooms remain ill equipped to reach out to new audiences.
The lack of diversity in the media has actually worsened in recent decades. Back in the heyday of local news, newsrooms were no less white or male, but being a journalist at least didn’t require a university degree – only a willingness to dive in and chase leads. Yet as the industry became concentrated more in big cities and employment prospects elsewhere diminished, education became yet another entry barrier. While the better-educated candidates moved up to higher-profile jobs, many others left the profession altogether.
In keeping with the industrial society of the time, the occupational model that followed from these changes was hierarchical. As with teachers and their pupils, preachers and their congregations, and experts and the lay public, education conferred status and authority upon journalists. The public was a passive recipient of information, not an engaged participant in a broader conversation.
Clinging to this hierarchical structure is now a recipe for failure. The digital world of information is one of choice and abundance, but also of considerable confusion about what is true and false. Trust is a news organization’s most valuable asset, and the task for journalists is both to challenge and inspire their audience, and to invite conversations among them.
That can’t happen unless journalism represents the society in which it is operating. Unfortunately, a recent global survey of media leaders finds that while editors see progress toward gender diversity, much more must be done to achieve racial and political diversity, as well as a balance between “urban” and “rural” backgrounds. The most likely reason for this failure is that industry leaders continue to regard the digital transformation as a matter of technology and process, rather than of talent and human capital.
Fortunately, the digital transformation represents an opportunity. As Jeff Jarvis of the City University of New York explains, industry leaders should “Try listening to, valuing, and serving the people and communities who were long ignored and left unserved by our old industry, mass media.” All news organizations should take Jarvis’s advice – and not just because it is the right thing to do. Their own survival depends on it.
This commentary was published in ten languages by Project Syndicate on June 25, 2020