There’s been a striking decline in public confidence in social media platforms, according to the 2025 Ethics Index published by the Governance Institute of Australia. One in four Australians now rate social media as “very unethical.”

This is consistent with other reports on Australian attitudes toward social media. For example, the Digital News Report 2025 similarly identified widespread concern about misinformation and distrust in news shared on social media.

And such distrust isn’t limited to Australia. The sentiment is evident worldwide. The 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer, based on an annual global survey of more than 30,000 people across 28 countries, reports a decline in trust in social media companies.

So where does this negativity come from? And are other ways of consuming information online, such as podcasts, any better? Podcasts are booming in Australia and around the world, and are often perceived much more positively than social media.

Let’s look at what the evidence says about the impacts of social media, what it does and doesn’t yet tell us about podcasts, and what this reveals about the need for accountability across digital platforms.

Where does this distrust stem from?

While social media has enabled connection, creativity and civic participation, research also highlights its downsides.

Studies have shown that, on certain social media platforms, false and sensational information can often spread faster than truth. Such information can also fuel negativity and political polarization.

Beyond civic harms, heavy social media use has also been linked to mental health challenges. The causes are difficult to establish, but studies report associations between social media use and higher levels of depression, anxiety and psychological distress, particularly among adolescents and young adults.

In 2021, Frances Haugen, a former Facebook product manager, made public thousands of internal documents that revealed Instagram’s negative impact on teen mental health. The revelations triggered global scrutiny and intensified debate about social media accountability.

Whistleblowers such as Haugen suggest social media companies are aware of potential harms, but don’t always act.

Podcasts have a much better reputation

In contrast to social media, podcasts appear to enjoy a very different reputation. Not only do Australians view them far more positively, but podcast consumption has significantly increased over the years.

More than half of Australians over the age of ten engage with audio or video podcasts on a monthly basis. It’s not surprising that the 2025 Australian election saw political leaders feature on podcasts as part of their campaign strategy.

Why are podcasts so popular and trusted? Several features may help explain this.

Consumption is often more deliberate. Listeners choose specific shows and episodes instead of scrolling through endless feeds. Podcasts typically provide longer and more nuanced discussions compared with the short snippets served by social media algorithms.

Given these features, research suggests podcasts foster a sense of intimacy and authenticity. Listeners develop ongoing “relationships” with hosts and view them as credible, authentic and trustworthy.

Yet this trust can be misplaced. A Brookings Institution study analyzing more than 36,000 political podcast episodes found nearly 70% contained at least one unverified or false claim. Research also shows political podcasts often rely on toxic or hostile language.

This shows that podcasts, while often perceived as more “ethical” than social media, are not automatically safer or more trustworthy spaces.

Rethinking trust in a complex media environment

What’s clear is that we shouldn’t blindly trust or dismiss any online platform, whether it’s a social media feed or a podcast. We must think critically about all the information we encounter.

We all need better tools to navigate a complex media environment. Digital literacy efforts must expand beyond social media to help people assess any information, from a TikTok clip to a long-form podcast episode.

To regain public trust, social media platforms will have to behave more ethically. They should be transparent about advertising, sponsorships and moderation policies, and should make clear how content is recommended.

This expectation should also apply to podcasts, streaming services and other digital media, which can all be misused by people who want to mislead or harm others.

Governments can reinforce accountability through fair oversight, but rules will only work if they are paired with platforms acting responsibly.

Earlier this year, the Australian government released a report that argued social media platforms have a “duty of care” toward their users. They should proactively limit the spread of harmful content, for example.

A healthier information environment depends on skeptical but engaged citizens, stronger ethical standards across platforms, and systems of accountability that reward transparency and reliability.

The lesson is straightforward: trust or distrust alone doesn’t change whether the information you receive is actually truthful—particularly in an online environment where anyone can say anything. It’s best to keep that in mind.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

A pledge by the shadow home secretary, Andrew Griffith, to “look again” at reforming the controversial IR35 disguised employment legislation has received a lacklustre response from contracting market stakeholders.

During a speech at the Conservative Party conference on Monday 6 October 2025, Griffith talked about his want to reignite the country’s spirit of entrepreneurship, saying: “I understand there are far too many hurdles for small businesses to jump [and] red tape that steals away the precious time of those who run them.”

He awent on to pay credit to the self-employed, who he described as “risk-takers” that are “striking out on their own, often with nothing more than a laptop and a belief they can make it work”, adding: “That’s why we commit today to doing better for the self-employed. And that includes looking again at reforming IR35.”

The IR35 legislation, which was originally introduced at the turn of the millennium to clamp down on disguised employment-enabled tax avoidance within contracting circles, was subject to reform by the Conservative government in 2017.

At the time, the changes saw public sector contractors cede control for deciding how they should be taxed to the organisations hiring them out of concern some individuals were mis-representing their employment status to artificially minimise their employment tax liabilities.

For example, contractors were claiming their public sector engagements meant they were working outside of the IR35 rules, meaning they should be taxed in the same way as off-payroll workers, when they were really working inside IR35. The latter designation means individuals should pay the same National Insurance Contributions (NICs) and Pay-As-You-Earn (PAYE) taxes as a salaried employee.

The reforms were later extended by the Conservative government, amid fierce opposition, to the private sector in April 2021. In October 2022, a Conservative government overseen by former prime minister Liz Truss set out plans in a “mini-budget” to repeal the IR35 reforms by April 2023, but this pledge was quickly abandoned 10 days after it was first announced.

Given the Conservative party’s chequered history on overseeing changes to the IR35 legislation, Griffith’s comments about embarking on another reform of the legislation has not been greeted as positively as perhaps the party was hoping.

Seb Maley, CEO of contracting insurance provider Qdos, said the promise of a reform and more support for the self-employed might make for “nice headlines” but “the devil would be in the detail”, adding: “Given how damaging IR35 reform has been for some, this latest pledge will be music to the ears of many freelancers, contractors and consultants – not to mention businesses. Others, though, will need more convincing.

“The fact of the matter is that the Conservatives had countless opportunities to rethink public and private sector IR35 reform, but ploughed on despite efforts across the industry to encourage them to consider the bigger implications. It’s also difficult to overlook the irony. The shadow chancellor is Mel Stride, who was one of the driving forces behind the introduction of IR35 reform under the previous government.”

Dave Chaplin, CEO of IR35 tax compliance firm IR35 Shield, said Griffith’s comments show that the Conservative Party “needs to make up its mind on IR35” after years of flip-flopping on the matter. “They’re calling for reform of the very legislation they created, repealed and reformed,” he said.

And the fallout from the reforms originally coming into force in 2017 is still being keenly felt across the contracting market today. “When the reforms were first introduced, they contained a significant flaw that placed disproportionate tax risk on firms. This led many large organisations to ban contractors altogether, which was never Parliament’s intention,” said Chaplin.

“These market distortions continue to harm both businesses and contractors. Many compliant contractors are now unable to find work and, as a result, are paying no tax, an outcome completely contrary to the policy’s aims. While the reforms sought to curb tax avoidance, the overreach has been substantial.”

At OpenAI’s developer conference in San Francisco on Monday, CEO Sam Altman and ex-Apple designer Jony Ive spoke in vague terms about the “family of devices” the pair are currently working to develop.

“As great as phones and computers are, there’s something new to do,” Altman said on stage with Ive. The duo confirmed that OpenAI is working on more than one hardware product but finer details, ranging from use cases to specifications, remain under wraps.

“Hardware is hard. Figuring out new computing form factors is hard,” said Altman in a media briefing earlier in the day. “I think we have a chance to do something amazing, but it will take a while.”

Ive said that his team has generated “15 to 20 really compelling product” ideas on the journey to find the right kind of hardware to focus the company’s efforts on.

“I don’t think we have an easy relationship with our technology at the moment,” said Ive. “Rather than seeing AI as an extension of those challenges, I see it very differently.” Ive explained that one reason he wanted to design an AI-powered device with OpenAI is to transform the relationship people currently have to the devices they use every day.

While Ive acknowledged the potential for AI to boost productivity, efficiency doesn’t appear to be his core goal with these devices. Rather, he hopes for them to bring more social good into the world. The devices should “make us happy, and fulfilled, and more peaceful, and less anxious, and less disconnected,” he said.

Earlier reporting indicated that OpenAI is planning to manufacture a new category of hardware that doesn’t resemble a phone or laptop. In a recent preview for OpenAI staff, Altman hinted that the product would be aware of a user’s surroundings and day-to-day experiences, according to The Wall Street Journal. The device might be screenless and rely on inputs from cameras and microphones.

OpenAI also hasn’t said publicly when it plans to launch the devices, though late 2026 may reportedly be the target launch, according to the Financial Times. The publication recently reported that development of the device has been stymied by technical issues.