[3] Because it can quickly be churned out (and thus is less expensive to produce), churnalism has become more common due to the revenue lost with the rise of Internet news and decline in advertising, with a particularly steep fall in late 2015.
A 2016 study of 1.8 million articles published by the U.S. and international editions of the HuffPost found that only 44% were written by staff journalists and thus could be considered original reporting.
[15] When the matter was debated at the Foreign Press Association, it was agreed that there was a relationship between the numbers of PR staff employed and journalists unemployed.
[18] In their book No Time to Think,[19] authors Howard Rosenberg and Charles S. Feldman emphasised the prioritization of speed in degrading the quality of modern journalism.
In April 2013, the American Sunlight Foundation, a non-profit organisation that advocates for openness and transparency, in partnership with the UK's Media Standards Trust, launched churnalism.com, an online tool to discover churn.
[21] The Register commented that some level of "churnalism" is both normal and healthy for news organisations, but said it considered the Media Standards Trust linked to campaigns supported by "wealthy and powerful individuals and celebrities" in favour of "state control of the media" in the UK, and claimed there was significant irony in the Sunlight Foundation tool launch announcement itself being "uncritically churned by many of the usual suspects".