While the few studies dedicated to media data collection practices rank them among the laggards, the scientific literature on the subject remains scattered. If the explanation often lies in the use of third-party cookies for targeted advertising, media outlets themselves are also seeking data. Tasked with building communities, better understanding their audiences and measuring their impact, some newsrooms see this as a key resource. What could be more effective for knowing—and thus persuading—an audience than understanding who they are, where they come from, what interests them, whether they read on a computer or Android phone? Seduced by the free nature and ease of use of certain tools, newsrooms have adopted this approach by default: better to have this information than nothing, it costs little and harms no one… or almost none.
In reality, these practices can prove far more costly than they appear, both in human and financial terms, and can contribute to eroding trust with readers. At a time when technological independence is gaining ground in public debate through growing mistrust of tech firms, newsrooms are called upon to be more transparent… and more measured in their data collection policies.
Are the media too greedy?
In 2016, two Princeton researchers analyzed the million most-visited websites. The result: news sites displayed more third-party trackers than any other category, ahead of sports, gaming… and even adult content. In 2021, a Press Gazette survey of nearly 3,800 sites confirmed the finding: despite themselves, media outlets had become the best allies of major tech firms in tracking internet users. The observation deserves nuance, however, as it depends on the business model and the country. The main culprit, the third-party cookie, primarily serves targeted advertising, and media outlets relying on subscriptions or donations logically depend on it less. Local legislation also matters: since the GDPR came into force in May 2018, a study noted a 22% drop in cookies on European news sites.
Despite disparities, the press shows a certain interest in data: for advertising, but also to understand its readership and build loyalty. In this area, the tool that has become the standard is called Google Analytics. Yet, while its use has become self-evident, its legality has not always been: as early as 2022, the CNIL found it non-compliant with the GDPR because of its data transfers to the United States. Google has since adjusted its product and agreements with Europe have authorized some of these exchanges… but their future is uncertain. Several media outlets, including Basta! and Reporterre, prefer alternatives such as Matomo or Plausible, hosted in Europe and claiming strict GDPR compliance.
The hunt for information doesn't stop at websites. Newsletters, the preferred format for bringing editorial teams closer to their audiences, sometimes push too far into subscribers' inboxes. In April 2026, the CNIL took a closer look at tracking pixels, those invisible images that signal to the sender when a message is opened. A widespread practice that it has now put in check: tracking newsletter opens requires the explicit consent of the recipient, and senders have three months to inform their subscribers and allow them to opt out.
The blind spot of tech transparency
These same news organizations that investigate digital surveillance and alert their readers to the practices of tech giants have become participants themselves. Researcher Tim Libert, a specialist on the subject, highlighted this inconsistency, even hypocrisy, in an opinion piece in the New York Times with a crystal-clear headline: "This article is spying on you". In France, Reflets.info, a digital investigation outlet specializing in surveillance and data, documented similar practices. In 2019, Libération announced it would remove advertising trackers for its subscribers. Upon investigation, they had simply been hidden.
While transparency has become a key principle for many media outlets, particularly those relying on donations to fund their activities, such as Vert, Arrêt sur images, and Reporterre, it often remains confined to editorial or economic matters. Technological transparency, however, remains a blind spot: deemed too technical, taboo, whether it concerns tools used internally or trackers placed on the reader's device. True, the law imposes transparent policies on cookies. But are they accessible? Relegated to the bottom of the page, they often amount to nothing more than a list of technical terms and endless dropdown menus. A media outlet's financial transparency is not reduced to directing readers to the annual declaration of its accounts without explanation or context; why should it be any different for tracking? The issue of technological independence is becoming more prominent in public debate and far transcends the mere question of which social networks to invest in or abandon. It deserves more than a page of sometimes misleading terms. Some media outlets, adopting lean tracking practices, have made this an editorial marker, even a commitment to their readership.
Belgian investigative magazine Médor even displays it clearly in its banner: "Médor does not track you through its cookies". Online media Next.ink incorporates its cookie policy into its ethical and journalistic charter, reaffirming the link between technical choices and respect for its editorial line.
Because beyond legality, it's a question of editorial consistency and independence. The American Prospect, a progressive American magazine, recently removed programmatic advertising from its site, the kind based on data collected from readers. For its editor-in-chief, David Dayen, the choice wasn't merely economic: "We write about lawsuits establishing that Google is guilty of abusing its dominant position, or that Facebook engages in certain advertising practices. And meanwhile, there we were, in some way contributing to perpetuating that business model. The contradictions, I believe, had become too glaring."
Another angle, often underestimated: the environment. Every tracker, commercial or not, slows down pages and multiplies requests. Continuous data collection constantly transfers information between servers; traffic and storage whose energy cost remains significant, while ever-heavier pages accelerate device obsolescence and fuel digital waste.
Measure less, but better
"Less but better" also applies to data collection: avoiding previous risks without abandoning the original goal of understanding your readership. The ease and free cost of certain tools suggest that collection requires neither time nor money. Yet installing and configuring these systems properly, ensuring, for example, that they are used legally, then compiling and interpreting their results, represents work that is far from negligible. And for what real benefit? Some media outlets are rethinking what is useful to measure, to rule out flattering but poorly meaningful indicators: vanity metrics or vanity indicators, those figures that flatter the ego but actually provide little value. The 19th, a nonprofit feminist American newsroom, developed its own indicator, the Total Journalism Reach, which doesn't count unique visitors but actual consumption of its journalism: republications, newsletters, events. In France, Contexte undertook similar work sorting through its indicators to focus for example on citations in other media outlets, rather than on page views. In Switzerland, Le Temps has long integrated into its thinking the fact that statistics are not everything.
In 2020, The Markup, a nonprofit American media outlet specializing in tech investigation, went further by developing its own features to escape tracking. Effective, but costly. The media outlet describes this as a « privacy tax »—the amount needed to ensure its readers can avoid tracking on its site: $18,000 for a video player, $3,000 to embed tweets without the social network's tracking, $18,000 for a donation system, etc.
Another avenue, sometimes overlooked: asking readers directly. Rather than tracking them without their knowledge, some media outlets consult them: audience research, usage surveys, panels… Someone who voluntarily fills out a form can provide more information, and with greater precision, than a cookie. Media outlets like The Atlantic have notably made quantitative research one of their assets.
Tracking is often presented as a business necessity; the experience of the American Prospect suggests otherwise. By eliminating its programmatic advertising, the magazine saw time spent on its site almost double in a month, while a donation campaign recruited nearly 500 new regular donors. Surveillance and loyalty don't necessarily go hand in hand.
