In this sponsored E&P interview, Jeremy Fields of Newsmatics discusses the changing nature of media trust, the rise of comparison-based news consumption and how Perspectify — a media transparency platform designed to help readers better understand publishers, ownership, perspectives and source credibility — is helping audiences gain a fuller view of the stories shaping the world.
For decades, publishers have focused on earning audience trust. But in today’s fragmented media environment, readers are increasingly seeking something else: transparency.
As audiences compare coverage across multiple outlets, examine ownership structures and look for additional context before forming opinions, a new generation of media transparency tools is emerging to help them navigate an increasingly complex information ecosystem.
Among them is Perspectify, a media transparency platform developed by Newsmatics that allows readers to compare how different outlets cover the same story while providing insight into publisher ownership, affiliations, editorial perspectives and source credibility. The platform is part of a broader effort by Newsmatics to build what it calls a “trust architecture” — a framework designed to help publishers, journalists and audiences better understand the context behind the information they consume. The goal is not to tell readers what to think, but to help them discover what they may be missing.
In this interview, Jeremy Fields discusses why transparency may become one of journalism’s most valuable trust signals, how audience behavior is changing and why he believes the future of news consumption will be shaped by perspective as much as content:
E&P: Jeremy, tell us about Perspectify and what problem Newsmatics was trying to solve when it developed the platform?
Jeremy Fields: The idea behind Perspectify grew out of a challenge we’re all seeing across the news ecosystem: trust in media continues to decline, and many readers are struggling to separate facts from narratives.
At Newsmatics, we believe one of the most effective ways to rebuild confidence in journalism is through greater transparency. Rather than telling people what to think or which sources they should trust, we wanted to create a tool that helps them better understand the information landscape for themselves.
Perspectify is a media transparency and comparison platform that allows readers to see how different outlets are covering the same story. Users can compare reporting across publications, explore ownership and affiliation information, review political orientation labels and gain additional context about the sources behind the news they consume.
What makes the platform unique is that it encourages readers to move beyond a single article or viewpoint. Instead of asking, “Which source should I trust?” they can ask, “Who else is covering this story?” and “What perspectives might I be missing?”
Ultimately, Perspectify was designed to strengthen media literacy and critical thinking. We believe journalism becomes stronger when readers have access to greater transparency, a wider range of perspectives and the tools needed to make informed decisions for themselves.
E&P: How does Perspectify actually work?
Jeremy Fields: It’s intentionally simple. A reader can visit Perspectify and search for a topic, issue or news event. The platform then allows them to compare how different publications are covering that story and examine the perspectives behind the reporting.
In addition to comparing coverage, users can access information about publication ownership, affiliations, editorial orientation and other contextual details that help explain why different outlets may approach the same story differently.
The goal isn’t to determine which source is right or wrong. The goal is to help readers understand the broader information ecosystem surrounding a story and make their own informed judgments.
E&P: For years, the media industry has focused on rebuilding trust. You argue there may be a different question emerging. What is it?
Jeremy Fields: Trust remains important, but audiences are increasingly asking a different question: How do I verify what I’m reading and gain a fuller understanding of a complex issue? People are no longer satisfied with consuming information from a single source. They’re comparing coverage, examining publisher backgrounds and looking for context that helps them determine not only whether a story is accurate, but whether it presents the complete picture.
E&P: You’ve described Perspectify as part of a larger effort by Newsmatics to build a “trust architecture.” What do you mean by that?
Jeremy Fields: We use the term trust architecture because rebuilding confidence in information requires more than a single tool. It requires a framework that helps publishers demonstrate transparency, journalists provide context and audiences better understand the information they encounter.
Trust architecture is about creating systems that make credibility more visible. That includes understanding who owns a publication, how information is sourced, what perspectives may be influencing coverage and how stories are being interpreted across different outlets. Perspectify is one component of that effort, but the broader objective is to create an environment where readers have the context they need to make informed decisions for themselves.
In many ways, we’re trying to move trust from being something people are simply asked to grant to something that can be examined, understood and earned through transparency.
E&P: What’s driving that shift in audience behavior?
Jeremy Fields: The media landscape has fundamentally changed. People used to rely on a relatively small number of newspapers and television networks. Today they’re exposed to thousands of publishers, newsletters, podcasts, influencers and independent news organizations. Readers have become more aware that ownership structures, editorial priorities, geographic focus and business models can influence how stories are framed. As a result, many people now seek multiple perspectives before forming conclusions.
E&P: You’ve said consumers are becoming their own fact-checkers. What do you mean by that?
Jeremy Fields: Rather than accepting a single article as definitive, readers increasingly want to know who owns a publication, whether the same story is being framed differently elsewhere and whether important facts may have been omitted. They’re investigating information for themselves. In many ways, audiences are becoming more active participants in the process of evaluating news.
E&P: Where does transparency fit into this?
Jeremy Fields: Transparency allows readers to understand the context behind the information they’re consuming. Every publication has perspectives, priorities and editorial judgments. Transparency isn’t about eliminating those things. It’s about helping audiences understand them. When readers can easily identify ownership, affiliations, editorial orientation and reporting history, they’re better equipped to evaluate information on its merits.
E&P: Does transparency require neutrality?
Jeremy Fields: Not at all. Transparency does not require neutrality. It requires clarity. Much like a nutritional label helps consumers understand what’s in their food, transparency provides context that helps readers understand the information they’re consuming.
E&P: You’ve argued that no single publication can fully explain every story. Why is that especially true today?
Jeremy Fields: A business publication may focus on economic impacts. A local newspaper may emphasize community effects. An international outlet may highlight geopolitical implications. A trade publication may focus on industry consequences. None of those perspectives are necessarily wrong. Together they often provide a more complete understanding than any individual source could offer alone.
E&P: Is that why we’re seeing more comparison-based news consumption?
Jeremy Fields: Exactly. Readers are recognizing that the best understanding of a topic often emerges when multiple viewpoints are examined side by side. The goal isn’t necessarily to find a perfectly objective source. It’s to gather enough context to identify common facts, understand competing interpretations and develop a more informed perspective.
E&P: What have you learned from watching users interact with transparency tools such as Perspectify?
Jeremy Fields: One of the most interesting things is that many users aren’t simply checking political leanings or ownership structures. They’re using transparency data as part of their research process. They’re comparing coverage, identifying recurring narratives and examining sources before sharing information with others.
Instead of asking, “Which source should I trust?” they’re increasingly asking, “What am I missing?” and “Who else is covering this story?” That distinction is incredibly important.
E&P: What does this mean for the future of media literacy?
Jeremy Fields: For years, media literacy focused on helping people identify misinformation. That’s still important. But the next phase may be helping audiences understand information ecosystems. Readers need visibility into ownership structures, publisher relationships, editorial tendencies and source credibility. They also need access to diverse perspectives that help them challenge assumptions and test narratives.
E&P: What opportunity does this create for publishers?
Jeremy Fields: Transparency can become a powerful trust signal. More broadly, publishers have an opportunity to participate in a larger trust architecture that helps audiences understand not only what is being reported, but who is reporting it, how it was produced and where it fits within a broader information ecosystem. As audiences become more sophisticated, organizations that openly communicate who they are, how they operate and why they make editorial decisions may be better positioned to build long-term credibility.
Trust is increasingly earned through openness rather than authority alone. Publishers that embrace transparency are not weakening their brands. In many cases, they’re strengthening them.
E&P: What’s the takeaway for publishers and readers alike?
Jeremy Fields: In a world where information is abundant but confidence is scarce, transparency provides something audiences are actively seeking: context. And when readers combine that transparency with perspectives from multiple publishers, they gain something even more valuable — a deeper understanding of the world around them.
About Newsmatics
Founded in 1995, Newsmatics is a global Data-as-a-Service (DaaS) company using AI to transform news into structured, scalable intelligence. With one of the world’s most comprehensive real-time indexing systems and a network of over 3,900 publications, Newsmatics powers smarter news distribution through platforms like EIN Presswire, Perspectify®, and Affinity Group Publishing. Celebrating 30 years of innovation in 2025, Newsmatics continues to lead in delivering trusted, bias-labeled, and highly targeted information at scale.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here