In an era where scrolling through feeds has become synonymous with staying informed, a groundbreaking study reveals a troubling reality: social media users are far more likely to engage with low-quality, sensational news than credible journalism. Analyzing nearly 11 million posts across platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter), researchers from New York University and Stanford University found that unreliable content garners significantly more clicks, even when shared by the same source to the same audience. This bias toward the unreliable isn’t just a quirk—it’s a systemic issue driven by algorithms that prioritize engagement over accuracy.

The study, published in the journal Nature, highlights how platforms amplify ‘junk’ news through their recommendation systems. ‘Sensational, unreliable stories win attention more easily,’ notes Digital Trends in their coverage of the research. Co-author Matthew Gentzkow from Stanford emphasized that the findings hold true across demographics, suggesting a platform-wide problem rather than user-specific behaviors.

The Algorithm’s Bias Toward Sensationalism

Delving deeper, the research team examined posts from 2016 to 2022, focusing on news links embedded in social media content. They classified sources using ratings from NewsGuard, a service that evaluates news credibility. High-credibility outlets like The New York Times scored near-perfect marks, while low-credibility sites often peddled misinformation. Shockingly, links from low-rated sources received 2.5 times more clicks than their credible counterparts.

This disparity persists regardless of the poster’s intent or audience composition. As reported by Pew Research Center in their 2025 Social Media and News Fact Sheet, about a fifth of Americans regularly get news from platforms like Facebook and YouTube, yet trust in these sources is eroding. The Pew report notes that while social media’s role in news consumption has surged, concerns over misinformation have intensified, with many users encountering false information daily.

Evolving Trust in the Digital Age

Current trends underscore this shift. A 2025 report from the World Economic Forum indicates that audiences are increasingly turning to social media and video for news, with podcast personalities and AI-generated summaries emerging as key influencers. However, this pivot comes at a cost: the same report warns of declining credibility as unverified content proliferates.

On X, posts from users like Mario Nawfal highlight plummeting trust in mainstream media, with only 29% of Americans expressing confidence—a record low. Nawfal’s thread, viewed over 100,000 times, points to citizen journalism as a potential savior, but experts caution that without verification, it could exacerbate the problem. Similarly, a post from Jay Van Bavel, PhD, reveals that just 0.1% of users share 80% of fake news, distorting public perceptions of norms.

Risks Amplified by Platform Dynamics

The Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF), explored in a 2025 MDPI study, illustrates how social media exposure heightens risk perception during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic. The study, based on a survey of 908 Chinese respondents, found that source credibility moderates engagement, with official sources sometimes undermining perceived risks due to over-trust.

Yet, as Digital Trends reports, the latest research shows users clicking more on dubious links, potentially amplifying misinformation. This is echoed in a Nieman Journalism Lab article from June 2025, which states that for the first time, social media has overtaken TV as Americans’ top news source, per the Reuters Institute’s Digital News Report. The shift raises alarms about credibility, with algorithms favoring outrage over facts.

Public Engagement and Misinformation Spread

Industry insiders note that platform incentives reward attention-grabbing content. A post on X from Politics In The Wild describes how algorithms prioritize emotional engagement, making truth ‘optional.’ This aligns with findings from a 2022 PMC article on trust and media credibility, which warns that social media’s role in spreading fake news has made it a problematic primary communication form.

Furthermore, a ResearchGate publication from 2025 examines social media as an information source, emphasizing the importance of update recency and credibility. It argues that while social media offers timely updates, the lack of editorial oversight often leads to unreliable information dominating feeds.

Case Studies in Credibility Crises

Real-world examples abound. During the 2024 U.S. elections, misinformation on platforms like TikTok influenced public opinion, as noted in a WebProNews article from June 2025. The piece highlights how social media’s rise as a news source sparks credibility concerns, with users often prioritizing speed over accuracy.

An Immediate Future blog post from October 2025 discusses the ‘trust gap’ between marketers and consumers, warning that brands ignoring this risk irrelevance. In the news realm, this translates to outlets struggling against viral falsehoods. A DISA report on the 2025 social media landscape points to shifting priorities, with users favoring niche platforms for perceived authenticity, yet still falling prey to unverified claims.

Strategies for Mitigating Risks

Experts advocate for better fact-checking integration. NewsData.io’s September 2025 blog explores benefits and risks, recommending tools like FactCheck.org to combat misinformation. They stress that while social media democratizes information, users must verify sources actively.

From an insider perspective, the Taylor & Francis journal article from March 2025 examines predictors of social media credibility, finding that user contacts and source attributes heavily influence perceptions. It reports that over half of U.S. adults access news via social media, per Pew Research Center’s 2023 data, but calls for education on discerning quality.

The Future of News Consumption

As we look ahead, the integration of AI in news curation poses new challenges. The World Economic Forum’s 2025 story notes emerging trends like AI answers, which could either enhance or further erode credibility depending on implementation.

Posts on X, such as one from Ask Perplexity, discuss motivated reasoning and platform incentives driving false claims. This sentiment is widespread, with users like Swimmingly lamenting skewed information that benefits agendas, leading to eroded trust.

Industry Responses and Innovations

Media organizations are adapting. The Reuters Institute’s findings, as covered by Nieman Journalism Lab, suggest digital subscriptions may have peaked, pushing outlets toward hybrid models that combat social media’s dominance.

In response, platforms are experimenting with labels and algorithms tweaks. However, the Nature study’s authors urge systemic changes, warning that without them, the ‘funhouse mirror’ of distorted norms— as described by Jay Van Bavel—will persist, shaping public opinion in unpredictable ways.