Imagine a world where the news you consume fits perfectly in the palm of your hand, scrolling seamlessly like the social media feeds we've all gotten hooked on. As we wrap up 2025, vertical video isn't just a trend—it's the new normal for news publishers, and it's shaking things up in ways that could redefine how we stay informed. But here's where it gets controversial: Are we sacrificing depth for convenience, or is this just the smart evolution of journalism to meet us where we are?
Just last year, around this time, I chatted with several major news outlets who were dipping their toes into vertical video directly on their own websites. These publishers had tested the waters on social platforms, noticed sky-high engagement rates, and decided it was time to bring that energy back home to their own digital spaces. This wasn't a whim—it was a strategic move to reclaim viewers who were drifting elsewhere.
Let's break this down for beginners: Vertical video means content shot in portrait mode, like what you see on TikTok or Instagram Reels, optimized for mobile screens. It's different from the traditional horizontal videos we're used to on TV or desktops. And the numbers back it up—nearly three-quarters of Americans tune into news videos online these days, with a whopping 61% preferring social media or YouTube for their fix (according to the Reuters Institute's Digital News Report 2025). To counter this, heavyweights like The Economist, Newsday, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and CNN have rolled out special in-app tabs dedicated to video viewing. The goal? To lure back those users and keep them engaged on the publishers' own turf.
Take Newsday's VP of digital development, TC McCarthy, for example. He put it bluntly: 'If our audience is shifting to a new format, we still want them getting their info from us. Journalism matters for an educated society, so let's meet people where they're at.' It's a reminder that in the digital age, adaptability is key—publishers aren't just reacting; they're proactively fighting for their role in the ecosystem.
And this is the part most people miss: These tabs aren't cookie-cutter; each one has its own flavor. The New York Times' Watch tab kicks off with autoplaying videos the moment you tap in, pulling from a curated mix of news, opinions, and even sections like cooking or tech reviews. The Economist offers a toggle between bite-sized vertical clips and their weekly horizontal show, 'Insider,' for those who want a bit more depth. Newsday's TV tab shines with live studio broadcasts, followed by themed video carousels—think sports, business, or lifestyle. Plus, both Newsday and The New York Times embed links to the full stories right in the videos, making it easy to dive deeper if you want.
Now, let's address a point that could spark debate: This surge in vertical video isn't the infamous 'pivot to video' disaster of the 2010s, where publishers poured resources into Facebook-only teams only to find crickets in viewership. Back then, faulty data misled many, leading to costly missteps. Today, the outlets I interviewed are ramping up video on their own platforms while still sharing vertical content on social media. As McCarthy from Newsday explained, 'We aim to serve our whole audience without forcing them to hop between apps. It's about convenience and comprehensive coverage.' But is this a sustainable balance, or are publishers setting themselves up for another round of over-investment in fleeting formats?
Everyone's tuning in to vertical video these days, and the stats prove it. Newsday integrated this feature into their app back in August, according to Emilio Guerra, their VP of digital content. Roughly 30% of users open the tab almost daily—impressive for a new addition. Most of their videos come in both horizontal and vertical formats, with about a third of all views on their sites going to the vertical versions. Surprisingly, 25% of those vertical views come from desktop users, even though overall desktop traffic sits below 20%. This suggests vertical video is bridging the gap between mobile and traditional browsing, appealing to a broader audience than you might think.
The Economist launched their dedicated video tab in March, reserving it exclusively for paid subscribers. Vertical video watch time across their app has more than doubled in the past year, shared Liv Moloney, their head of video. She pointed to an insightful Economist article on how seniors' screen time has exploded—think grandparents sending more Instagram Reels than ever. 'The notion that only kids are into this is off-base,' she noted. 'It's anecdotal, but my own dad shares way more short videos now than a few years ago.' This challenges stereotypes and highlights how vertical video is democratizing news consumption across generations, perhaps making it more inclusive than horizontal formats that feel more 'formal.'
But here's the twist that might surprise you: While these tabs draw heavy inspiration from social media, they steer clear of the bells and whistles like comments, likes, or algorithmic feeds. If two people open the tab, they'll see identical content—curated by human editors, not machines. The New York Times' video director, Solana Pyne, explained it well: 'We aimed for a core experience focusing on essentials. We're not mimicking TikTok; their main gig is pure engagement, not delivering facts. Our priority is quality journalism.' It's a deliberate choice to prioritize substance over spectacle, but does this lack of interactivity make these tabs less engaging in the long run?
Curating the content is where publishers shine. At The New York Times, editors hand-pick videos from diverse sections, starting with breaking news and investigations, then mixing in broader coverage. 'We hook you with the urgent stuff first, then let you explore our full range,' Pyne said. Personalization might come later, but for now, it's all about that curated touch. The Economist and Newsday use sectioned carousels—scrollable playlists for news, sports, business, or lifestyle. As McCarthy from Newsday put it, 'Editors who know their audiences best make these calls, and so far, they're outpacing what any algorithm could do.' No comments yet, mainly because moderation is resource-intensive, though Moloney from The Economist sees potential for community-building down the line. Newsday's McCarthy hints at adding 'likes' eventually, but only after testing the waters. 'Rushing in social features and algorithms requires big tech spends,' he warned. 'We need to see if the tab resonates first.' This raises a controversial question: In an era of ultra-personalized feeds, is human curation enough to compete, or are publishers risking obsolescence by not embracing more dynamic tools?
For now, ads are mostly off the table in these tabs. The Economist keeps it ad-free as part of their subscriber allure, with two-thirds of revenue from subscriptions and the rest from ads. Their app saw over 270 million visits last year, up from 239 million, and 85% of new subs are digital-only. 'Diverse content keeps subscribers coming back,' Moloney said, noting top videos span economics to book recs, mimicking the magazine's variety. Meanwhile, The New York Times and Newsday offer free access to these videos, even on social. But advertisers are eyeing this space—Instagram shows ads after eight Reels, TikTok after three. Joy Robins, NYT's global chief advertising officer, announced an upcoming beta for vertical video ads in early 2026, promising simplicity for brands. Newsday's in early talks too, though they're keeping it ad-free initially. 'We're focusing on smooth viewing now,' McCarthy said, but Emilio Guerra noted advertisers already know the drill. This shift could mean more targeted, quick-hit ads, but at what cost to user experience? Will monetization dilute the journalistic integrity these tabs aim to uphold?
As we look ahead, vertical video on publishers' own platforms represents a bold step toward retaining audiences in a fragmented media landscape. But is this the future, or just a bridge to something bigger? What do you think—does embracing vertical formats help news stay relevant, or does it dumb down serious reporting? Share your thoughts in the comments: Agree that curation trumps algorithms, or disagree that ads will ruin the experience? Let's debate!
