Vincent Peyrègne's Predictions 2026

Also in our Predictions 2026 series, interviews with James Hewes, Ludovic Martin and Christophe Albericci

Q. What’s the most inconvenient assumption print publishers still make going into 2026 — the one that feels comforting, but is probably wrong?

I’m afraid that “strong trusted brands” and “good journalism”, supported by upskilled news staff, investments in AI infrastructure, and increased automation and personalisation, may not be sufficient to help publishers withstand the AI wave; its implications are far more profound. If the newsroom remains central to any publishing business, then a more diversified portfolio that supports this core should extend beyond our traditional media streams: print, digital, and events. Furthermore, in light of the rise of the “creator economy”, journalistic and news-brand legitimacy no longer ensures narrative dominance. For news media professionals, there is both an economic and epistemological paradigm to overcome.

Q. Where should publishers stop copying digital in 2026 — and what should they deliberately choose to be famous for (for readers and advertisers)?

Shifting the industry’s focus from quantity and clicks to usefulness and connection: journalism is no longer about “breaking news” but “bridging news”, offering more nuanced and constructive reporting that mirrors the concerns of their audiences. If trust in news, brand reputation, and authority are the industry’s top priorities, publishers should be recognised as pillars of public trust — and destinations where audiences find non-binary narratives that foster a more inclusive public debate.

While the newsroom and good journalism are at the heart of any publishing business, I’m unsure that focusing solely on “digital news” will be enough to regain control of our audiences. Despite market signals showing their attention span falling to the bottom of the digital chart, and despite their efforts to improve reporting, most publishers still see their print business as just a declining financial metric. Although print should play a vital role within a broader omnichannel strategy, publishers often view it mainly as a business to exploit intensively before divesting — or simply ending the “agony” by discontinuing print. I see a contradiction here. If the audience is the queen, print should be regarded from a broader market and user perspective.

Q. In your view, is Europe drifting into a form of data colonialism where trust, attention and ad value are extracted by Big Tech — and if so, what should publishers and advertisers do differently in 2026 to keep money (and power) supporting verified national media rather than leaking into programmatic systems?

 We are observing how content production and distribution might unbind in real time. The European sovereignty aspect isn’t just technical — it concerns whether media owners keep control of user relationships or become suppliers to someone else’s platform. I want to give a clear answer to this question, but the importance of independence and control over the value chain seems to have faded over the past thirty years. Yet, it was a key focus for earlier generations of publishers who suffered under political control. Unfortunately, sovereignty remains a low priority for the business community. It is a highly politically sensitive term, and our publishers are somewhat hesitant to adopt it.

If a consensus emerges on the strategic importance of information and journalism in protecting the public good, the radicalisation and excesses of the US administration, coupled with the risks of alarming and freedom-threatening Chinese influence, could prompt international business and political circles to unite in revitalising a multilateral framework that fosters a fair balance of power. By 2025, Google earned more revenue outside the US than within it, and it is not alone. Both Meta and Apple generate approximately two-thirds of their revenue from international markets. With domestic market saturation, these giants now rely on global markets for growth. This provides Europe, Australia, and emerging markets across Africa and Asia-Pacific with unprecedented leverage. We are entering a complex era of sovereign AI and localised data mandates, alongside aggressive digital taxation policies and increased geopolitics and tech protectionism. How these companies handle international sovereignty — and how nation-states exercise their newfound power — will be the defining technology story of the year.

Q. From your WAN-IFRA vantage point, what shift did you try to encourage earlier to slow the decline in print circulation and print advertising — and what stopped it scaling?

An organisation like WAN-IFRA, or any other professional body, derives its legitimacy and financial capacity from its members’ mandates and its willingness to support them. This presents a challenge at the national level. It becomes even more difficult at the international level, which is WAN-IFRA’s domain. As print media became more challenging and digital emerged as the new frontier, WAN-IFRA’s priorities have aligned with those of our members. Nonetheless, we did not give up.

First, by documenting the state of our ecosystem through our World Press Trends Outlook report — an annual study that provides an in-depth view of the current and future landscape of the global news media industry. In its latest edition, WAN-IFRA’s World Press Trends Outlook report shows that although print continues to decline as a proportion of total revenue, it remains the largest source of income for our survey respondents. On average, print circulation and advertising together make up nearly 45% of revenues.

Secondly, by uniting our members around common issues that are important enough to motivate them. This is why, unlike most publishers’ organisations, we have always maintained a department and community dedicated to print — the World Printers Forum. Recently, this forum of printing industry professionals has been strengthened by integrating DistriPress into WAN-IFRA. This has given new momentum to WAN-IFRA’s print division, which will undoubtedly also benefit from the recent merger with FIPP, the global magazine press association, many of whose members operate print as their core business. I hope that, in the future, through player aggregation and renewed alliances with similar organisations, WAN-IFRA will be able to develop new joint initiatives, and that new projects such as ‘Print Forward’, launched jointly by the World Printers Forum and DistriPress, will emerge from collective efforts to support investment in print.

Q. Some argue that a healthy, trusted press is a public good that advertising also benefits from. Should advertisers play a more explicit role in supporting quality news publishing — and if yes, what would a credible, non-tokenistic mechanism look like (beyond occasional “purpose” campaigns)?

You will find individuals in the advertising industry who unequivocally adhere to this principle personally, but very few, if any, advertising or media agencies that publicly support it. The German-based “Initiative 18”, founded by Manfred Kluge, is one such example. I completely understand. In such a competitive environment, their primary role is to focus on customer satisfaction. And their clients demand, above all, a data-backed return on their investment, mainly concerning volume. Given the fragmentation of the press sector, it is challenging to compete with large globalised digital platforms in this arena. Thanks to publishers’ alliances like Swiss OneLog AG, publishers can offer encouraging insights, at scale, into the true value of professional news media. However, these initiatives remain limited at the national level, where they exist at all.

Q. NYT’s digital subscription success is often held up as the model. What is the single most transferable lesson for publishers in Europe — and the biggest misconception people take from the NYT story?

The most transferable lesson from the NYT story is that bundling news with collateral services, including Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter, and The Athletic, is a recipe for success.

The biggest misconception might be that the NYT continues to winnow down its news-only subscription, while the single-product tier — not the bundle — was the fastest-growing subscription tier in one of its latest quarterly reports from the end of 2025. The number of “bundle and multiproduct” subscribers grew by 250,000, while the number of subscribers to either Games, Wirecutter, Audio, The Athletic or Cooking grew by 330,000 — and most notably, the number of news-only subscribers shrank by 130,000, and the number of print subscribers fell by 10,000 to 570,000

Q. Inside the newsroom, is ubiquitous AI nudging publishers towards a ‘good enough’ standard — and what safeguard should editors insist on in the next 12–24 months? 

I don’t believe we face a significant problem with AI in general. Algorithmic techniques have been extensively used and validated for many years. Although they are constantly improving at a remarkable rate, the performance of generative AI remains too unstable to meet professional and reader standards.

AI literacy and experimentation continue to be top priorities for most newsrooms. Once again, everything is advancing rapidly, but I still encounter many colleagues who are confronted with questions from their teams that focus on personal concerns about job security. Communicating AI policies effectively to a large, busy workforce remains a major internal challenge. There is still substantial work needed on transparency, disclosure, and editorial charters, both internally and with users.

Q. Print has a clear reading-on-paper advantage. Why isn’t this being used more effectively in advertiser conversations — and what would make it a credible, buyer-friendly claim in 2026?

The primary limitation is that you cannot provide advertisers with enough immediately usable, measurable evidence to meet their need for assessing print advertisement performance. Print will never surpass digital in this respect. The errors of digital platforms make print more appealing, but print lacks the scale, pricing flexibility, and operational agility to outshine digital’s appeal. I fear that the “brand safety” argument alone will not be enough to persuade media planners, who are increasingly guided by — or even replaced by — artificial intelligence. Additionally, it is difficult to dispute that an older audience is less attractive to advertisers aiming at younger generations.

Business and other niche or professional titles are often more appealing to certain print advertisers targeting pre-qualified audiences (e.g., decision-makers in specific industries) and can often command higher value from such advertisers in print than broad general-interest newspapers. However, there is no single global metric indicating they consistently “perform better” across all print advertising markets. Better performance depends on the advertiser’s objectives, sector, and target audience rather than a universal rule.