YouTube and Journalism: Both Partners and Rivals

Author of Partnership Section: Gabriel Avalos

Author of Intro, Conclusion, & Rivalry Section: Lily Roberti

(Survey Results Gathered by Lily Roberti from College Students in October 2025)

When YouTube broke out as a new, user-generated streaming platform in early 2005, it forever altered the way that journalism functions as an industry. Facing both positive and negative impacts as a result of YouTube’s increasingly massive popularity, journalism and news-reporting would never be the same. YouTube both worked alongside with and challenged big media businesses and existing news corporations, partnering with them to put out cutting-edge content while also diverting user attention to an arguably more democratic way of receiving news.

YouTube rapidly developed into an important platform for large news corporations and television networks. Many broadcasters saw it as a way of engaging new viewers and continuing to drive traffic to their pre-existing content, rather than immediately thinking of YouTube as a competitor or competition. During the time, YouTube was in its own niche. Starting in the mid-2000s, YouTube gave these corporations an easy, no-cost platform for distributing short clips, interviews, and previews, and to reach hundreds of thousands of people globally. During this internet-crazed phase, corporations were taking any chance to be able to use social media to better enhance traditional media and journalism. 

By 2006 and 2007, major networks like CNN, NBC, and the BBC had already begun using YouTube to post their content. CNN became one of the first big news networks to work directly with YouTube when it partnered on the CNN-Youtube presidential debates in 2007. This event allowed people to record and upload video questions for the U.S. presidential candidates, which were then shown live during the debate. The partnership at the time was aimed at starting a conversation with the younger audience of YouTube, using YouTube as a bridge to have more young voters look at the debating candidates' campaigns, and hopefully get them involved and invested in the campaign.

The BBC also saw an opportunity in YouTube early on. In 2006, it launched an official YouTube channel to post short clips and highlights from its television shows and news reports. The New York Times reported that the BBC used its YouTube channels mainly to promote its shows. “Features clips from the new BBC shows and promotional materials for series like ‘Doctor Who.’” This helped the BBC reach a larger audience, many of whom didn't have access to its TV broadcasts. In the same way, NBC made a deal with YouTube as well that same year to share highlights from the Office, Saturday Night Live, and other programs, using YouTube as a new kind of marketing tool. 

For news outlets, YouTube was not just a means to promote shows, but also a platform for experimenting with various types of journalism. Many broadcasters posted extra interviews, web-only stories, web-only series, and behind-the-scenes videos. These clips provided viewers with more access, making news feel more personal and interactive. YouTube’s system also simplified distribution for big media companies. It costs a lot of money and time to upload videos to their own website, but YouTube provides free hosting and is instantly accessible all over the world. It offered revenue-sharing from ads, also providing companies with revenue streams from views online.

While in many ways, YouTube aided media conglomerates, it also proved to take away from them by acting as significant competition. Piers Morgan, an English broadcast personality and journalist who is currently trying to expand his business through YouTube, commented on this impending shift, saying, “Certain newspapers just won’t exist in the UK…Look at what young people do. I don’t see anyone under 45 buying a print newspaper…This is the wake-up moment” (Savage). Consumers have a natural drive to directly engage with their news and share their own content and opinions, as opposed to simply soaking up infinite information from big media businesses like a sponge. YouTube and other social streaming platforms made that possible. Matt Schiavenza, for The Atlantic, wrote that these platforms “bolstered the dreams of idealists who want to use technology to solve the world's problems… [and they] allowed people to see the world from more points of view.” In this respect, YouTube and such platforms acted as partners to democracy, even more so than traditional news sources, because of their open forum design. 

The Project for Excellence in Journalism published “The State of the News Media 2005; An Annual Report on American Journalism” two decades ago, already citing a decline in newspaper readership and an increase in online news consumption. In 2004, half of those surveyed by the PEJ shared they no longer viewed their newspaper as believable, as public trust in media eroded. When the public was asked which media source is most important to them, only 11% said newspapers, while 20% said the internet. Additionally, in 2005, 36% of people reported going online for news regularly, up from 30% in 2000. This trend has continued over time, with less people relying on online publications and newspapers for information each year. User-generated content on social media sites like TikTok, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube have become a daily replacement for big media businesses in the public’s everyday lives.

Ultimately, YouTube’s initial release in 2005 prompted innovative collaborations with existing media sources that still exist to this day. However, it can be argued that the competition YouTube has brought to journalism’s existing form has been greater than the support. Regardless, both perspectives are true. The shift is nuanced, and whether for greater good or bad, the tangible effects of YouTube’s profound impact on journalism are inseparable from the industry today. It is increasingly important to examine the way that journalism is evolving; news is and will always be paramount to preserving democracy and maintaining an informed citizenry.