A breaking story appears on your social media feed. Someone has shared a screenshot, a video clip, or a dramatic headline. Before forwarding it, you pause to check the source. You look for a familiar logo, a known broadcaster’s watermark, or a recognised byline. You ask, almost instinctively: who is saying this?
The pause, brief but deliberate, is not hesitation. It is judgment. And in Kenya’s rapidly shifting media landscape, it may be the most important behaviour a news consumer exercises. Because while social media has transformed how we consume news, it has not changed the question every news consumer eventually asks: Can I trust this?
Platforms have changed, but trust hasn’t
The numbers are unambiguous. The Media Council of Kenya’s State of the Media 2025 Survey is clear. Social media is now the primary source of news for Kenyans at 39%, ahead of television at 31%, radio at 21%, and newspapers at just 13%—a figure that stood at 29% as recently as 2022. The migration from traditional to digital is no longer a trend. It is the settled reality.
Yet another finding in the same survey complicates the narrative. Despite this shift, when Kenyans were asked which media outlet they trust most, the overwhelming majority named a traditional broadcast group. Meanwhile, the most visited news websites are platforms built on brand recognition cultivated through conventional media.
Kenyans have changed where they consume news, but they have not changed who they trust. Social media is where audiences encounter information first, but established credibility remains where they go to decide whether it is true.
Scepticism is the new default
This behaviour is not a passive habit. It is a rational response to a deeply unreliable information environment.
Anyone can post news online, claim to be a source, or produce content that looks and sounds authoritative. In response, audiences have developed a self-regulation instinct. They are seeking attribution from recognisable sources and interrogating what lands in their feed before sharing it further.
The 2025 survey confirms this vigilance is widespread. The spread of false and misleading information is cited by 28% of Kenyans as their single biggest media concern today, tied with inadequate coverage of key issues. These are not passive consumers. As active sceptics, they understand that the abundance of information has made trustworthiness the defining challenge of the digital age.
For communicators, this creates both a warning and an opportunity. Audiences are not simply watching who publishes first. They are watching who publishes correctly.
AI is making credibility harder to verify
The verification instinct is now under a more sophisticated threat than simple misinformation.
The survey reveals that while 59% of Kenyans are aware artificial intelligence is being used in media production, 63% cannot identify AI-generated content when they encounter it. Audiences have historically judged credibility by recognising a journalist’s voice, a broadcaster’s identity, or a publication’s tone. AI can now replicate all of these with no editorial standards and no accountability attached.
The scale of exposure amplifies the risk. Nearly half of Kenya is now online, and 91% access digital media through mobile phones. In this environment, fabricated content can reach millions of people within hours. Speed and emotion drive sharing, and here’s where misinformation is most dangerous. In this context, a communicator’s established reputation for accuracy is no longer a professional virtue. It is the only reliable filter many audiences have left.
Trust is recovering, but must be earned in new spaces
Public debate often assumes that trust in the media is declining. The data points in a different direction.
79% of Kenyans now express some or a lot of trust in the media, up from 74.5% the previous survey. The proportion who believe media coverage of government is unfair has dropped from 73.6% to 46%, a significant credibility recovery in a calendar year. Growing awareness of misinformation appears to be making audiences more deliberate about who they trust, and more loyal to the sources consistently earning it.
But let’s look at what is driving this recovery. Content relevance leads at 45%, timeliness follows at 33%, and credibility and reputation come in at 29%. These are the operating expectations of digital audiences as much as they are traditional journalism values.
The message is direct: credibility cannot be inherited from a broadcast or print legacy. Credibility must be demonstrated where audiences now live on the same social platforms they use daily. This means sourcing captions, correcting mistakes publicly, and choosing accuracy over engagement in every headline.
Credibility is the competitive advantage
Kenya’s social media audience is sceptical, fast-moving, and actively searching for sources they can rely on in an environment saturated with content they cannot fully verify.
The communicators who will earn lasting trust are not necessarily those with the largest following. They are those willing to be accurate when speed is tempting, transparent when opacity is easier, and consistent when the algorithm rewards sensation over substance. Audiences today evaluate communicators not only by what they publish, but by how they handle errors and whether they maintain standards under pressure.
Attention can be won through trends and viral content. Trust is won through accuracy, integrity, and the discipline to maintain both when neither is convenient. In Kenya’s social media age, credibility is not a soft value or a professional courtesy. Building it takes years, while it can be lost in mere seconds.
Read Also: Gen Z Backs Social Media Ban for Under-16s in Surprising Global Shift
By Pancras Mutuma, a Communications Consultant and a Senior Partner at AM Communications.