The Erosion of Trust: Why Mainstream Media in Canada and the USA Manipulate News and Their True Motivations

By Dara Jerde

Once upon a time, the evening news was a sacred ritual for millions of households across Canada and the United States. Anchors like Walter Cronkite, often dubbed "the most trusted man in America," delivered the day’s events with a gravitas that felt unassailable. His sign-off, "And that’s the way it is," was a promise of truth in an era when journalism was seen as a public service. Fast forward to March 20, 2025, and that trust has crumbled. Mainstream media outlets in both countries are increasingly accused of manipulating news, peddling "fake news," and straying far from their once-noble roots. But why? What drives this shift, and what are the real motivations behind it? The answer lies in a toxic brew of profit, power, and polarization—leaving a public that’s losing faith at an alarming rate.

The Mechanics of Manipulation

Mainstream media—think CNN, Fox News, CBC, or CTV—don’t always fabricate stories from scratch. Instead, manipulation often takes subtler forms: selective framing, omission of key details, or amplifying narratives that fit a preconceived agenda. Take a hypothetical example: a protest in Toronto or Chicago could be reported as a "peaceful demonstration" by one outlet and a "violent uprising" by another, depending on the footage they choose and the adjectives they deploy. Both might be technically accurate but deliberately skewed to evoke different emotions. Then there’s the outright distortion—using out-dated images, misattributed quotes, or AI-generated content passed off as real, all of which have been documented in recent years.

This isn’t new, but it’s accelerated. In the U.S., the 2016 election spotlighted how mainstream outlets amplified sensational (and sometimes dubious) claims to keep viewers hooked. In Canada, coverage of issues like Indigenous rights or trade disputes with the U.S. has often leaned into narratives that align with political or corporate interests, sidelining inconvenient facts. The line between news and propaganda blurs when headlines are crafted to provoke rather than inform.

The Motivations: Profit, Power, and Polarization

So, what’s the endgame? First, there’s profit. The media landscape has shifted dramatically since Cronkite’s day. Where once a handful of networks competed for credibility, today’s outlets battle for clicks, shares, and ad revenue in a 24/7 digital ecosystem. Sensationalism sells—whether it’s fear mongering about immigration or hyping a celebrity scandal. A 2023 study showed that emotionally charged headlines get 46 times more engagement than neutral ones, and mainstream media have taken note. The pressure to churn out content fast and cheap often trumps fact-checking or nuance.

Second, there’s power. Media conglomerates in both Canada and the U.S. are often owned by a shrinking pool of corporate giants with vested interests. In Canada, companies like Bell or Rogers control vast swaths of TV, radio, and print, while in the U.S., players like Comcast (NBC) or Sinclair Broadcast Group dominate. These entities don’t just report news—they shape it to protect their bottom lines or curry favour with political allies. For instance, a Canadian network might downplay telecom regulation debates, while a U.S. outlet might push a partisan line to align with its owner’s ideology. It’s not about truth; it’s about influence.

Finally, polarization fuels the fire. In an era where audiences self-sort into echo chambers, media outlets cater to specific tribes—progressive, conservative, or nationalist—rather than aiming for objectivity. Fox News thrives on outrage-driven conservative talking points, while CNN leans into liberal anxieties. In Canada, the CBC is often accused of a left-leaning bias, while Rebel News pushes a populist counter-narrative. Each side exaggerates or twists stories to keep their base loyal, widening societal divides. The result? A fractured public fed competing realities, with "fake news" as the by-product.

The Fall of Trust

The days of Walter Cronkite’s unifying voice are a distant memory. Back then, journalism was a public trust, not a corporate machine. Cronkite’s CBS News operated in a regulated era with fewer channels and a shared sense of civic duty. Today, trust in media has plummeted. A 2024 poll found only 31% of Americans trust mainstream news "a lot" or "somewhat," down from 55% in 1994. In Canada, a 2023 survey showed 40% of citizens believe traditional media is "often untruthful," a sharp rise from a decade ago. People aren’t just skeptical—they’re tuning out entirely or turning to social media, where misinformation thrives but at least feels less polished and preachy.

This erosion isn’t just about fake news scandals—like the time U.S. outlets ran with unverified claims about election fraud, or when Canadian media hyped a "tax crisis" that never materialized. It’s about a deeper betrayal. Readers and viewers sense the agenda behind the screen, whether it’s pushing a political slant or burying a story that doesn’t fit the narrative. X posts trending in early 2025 highlight this frustration: users lament "corporate media lies" and "clickbait over facts," reflecting a visceral rejection of the old guard.

Where Do We Go From Here?

The mainstream media’s slide into manipulation isn’t irreversible, but it’s entrenched. Their motivations—profit, power, and feeding polarization—aren’t going away in a hyper-competitive, digitally driven world. Yet, the public’s growing distrust offers a glimmer of hope. People are seeking alternatives—independent journalists, raw data, even firsthand accounts on social media platforms—though these come with their own pitfalls. The challenge is discernment: separating signal from noise in a cacophony of voices.

Walter Cronkite’s era wasn’t perfect, but it held a standard of integrity that feels quaint today. Mainstream media in Canada and the U.S. could reclaim some trust by prioritizing facts over spin, but that would mean defying the incentives that now define them. Until then, "fake news" isn’t just a buzzword—it’s a symptom of a system that’s lost its way, leaving a skeptical public to pick up the pieces.

Dara Jerde is a a freelance writer for Veritas Expositae

You can reach her at dara.jerde@veritasexpositae.com