Issue 06 December 2025

Issue 06 December 2025

Zulu Digital Microscope: US Media 2000-2025

Zulu Digital Microscope: US Media 2000-2025

Alex Asseily | Founder, Zulu Group

Introduction

This monthly, we are doing a deeper dive on US media dynamics and how the rise of independent media has (counter-intuitively) has had a dramatic impact on the structure of US media generally - this effect has only taken hold in the last 5 years! It shows that 

Here’s what we did:

  • Estimated a Unique Monthly Audience (UMA) for each outlet, combining publicly visible reach metrics from websites, YouTube, podcasts, and major social platforms into a single cross‑platform figure.

  • Standardized all figures to a 30-day rolling window, then applied probabilistic de-duplication factors—calibrated based on each outlet's main platform and media type (e.g., video-heavy vs. text/podcast-focused)—to model and reduce audience overlap, producing a unified, comparable reach estimate.

  • Relied exclusively on public data and third-party analytics (e.g., Social Blade, vidIQ), which means UMA should be read as a consistent, directional indicator of relative scale and growth (especially for larger outlets), not a precise census.

A Media Network Becoming Wiser: Core Insights

One of the most surprising bits of research we put together during The Age of Wisdom series revealed a surprising and encouraging trend in the US media landscape: in the last 25 years, independent media outlets have multiplied and effectively swallowed up corporate outlets in terms of sheer audience size. 

The modern information environment is becoming denser, faster, and—paradoxically—more self-correcting:

  1. Diversity as an epistemic stabilizer.
    More ideological variety and a greater number of distinct voices raise the probability of error-correction. When the network contains many independent nodes, contradictions surface sooner and bad information is harder to sustain.

  2. Connectivity as a defence against disinformation.
    High-link density between creators, platforms, and audiences accelerates feedback loops and makes coordinated disinformation campaigns—especially those driven by concentrated special interests—fundamentally more fragile.

  3. The rise of the independent tier.
    Independent creators now operate with formats (long-form interviews, livestreams, rich comment cultures) that embody rapid, diverse, audience-driven feedback. Compared to the year 2000—an era defined by tight thought silos—today’s ecosystem is structurally more conversational and less gate-kept.

  4. Authenticity through long-form depth.
    Independent channels rely on extended, minimally pre-packaged formats that correlate with greater epistemic openness. Their narratives are less shaped by editorial boards, owners, or advertisers, and more by the need to maintain coherence before a highly interactive audience.

  5. Different incentives, different truths.
    Corporate media maintains professional training and institutional structure, but these bring implicit agenda constraints tied to ownership and advertising pressures. Independent media, by contrast, is answerable mainly to followers and subscribers, encouraging adaptability and coherence rather than deference to external interests. The project’s political-spectrum and ownership maps directly illuminate these contrasting incentive architectures.

  6. Decentralized accountability.
    The proliferation of independent voices across the political spectrum—Democracy Now! and Mother Jones on the left; Crowder, Shapiro, and others on the right; Rogan and Breaking Points in mixed territory—creates a mesh of “edge nodes” that publicly test the narratives of legacy institutions. This distributed interrogation system acts as a form of networked oversight.

  7. Cross-tribal audience flow and epistemic independence.
    Audience-overlap data shows ideological silos eroding. Viewers increasingly consume both independent and legacy brands, achieving issue-by-issue independence rather than strict partisan alignment.

  8. The rise of information density.

    Independent long-form video and audio creators now reach audiences comparable to or larger than many legacy brands. Their format—more exploratory, more dialogic—reflects a shift from sound-bite communication toward deeper narrative bandwidth.

A New Pillar of Networked Sensemaking

The Zulu Digital Microscope is not merely media analytics; it is emerging as a piece of epistemic infrastructure for Networked Sensemaking. By quantifying how audience power, narrative formation, and media incentives have shifted from 2000 to 2025, it illuminates both the bottlenecks and the new leverage points of the collective brain. The result is a clearer view of where coherence is generated, where it is constrained, and how a more adaptive, truth-aligned information ecosystem may continue to evolve.

The Zulu take

(Sky) Dancing into problems:


Consolidation of so many media assets under a single roof (Sky Dance), and perhaps a single ideology, seems bad.

(Sky) Dancing into problems:


Consolidation of so many media assets under a single roof (Sky Dance), and perhaps a single ideology, seems bad.

(Sky) Dancing into problems:


Consolidation of so many media assets under a single roof (Sky Dance), and perhaps a single ideology, seems bad.

(Sky) Dancing into problems:


Consolidation of so many media assets under a single roof (Sky Dance), and perhaps a single ideology, seems bad.

“The condition of the world can be changed not by outer reforms alone, but by awakening the feeling of sympathy in human hearts. When sympathy is born, the soul becomes a blessing to the world.”
“The condition of the world can be changed not by outer reforms alone, but by awakening the feeling of sympathy in human hearts. When sympathy is born, the soul becomes a blessing to the world.”

Inayat Khan (1882-1927)

Subscribe

Subscribe

Subscribe

Subscribe

Subscribe

Subscribe

Share to: