You walk into the doctor with a cold. They prescribe an X-ray.
You walk in with a headache. X-ray.
Need glasses? X-ray.
Depressed? X-ray.
Imagine every time you went to the doctor, no matter what was wrong, you got the same treatment — and most times, it did nothing. Or worse, it caused more harm. Two hundred years ago in the U.S., that was about the case. Whatever your ailment, many “doctors” reached for the same handful of treatments for any condition: bloodletting, purging, opium, and few others. Come in with anything from a headache to chest pain, you’d be walking away with the same treatment.
What changed? The medical field developed evidence-based consensus around the cause of diseases and the effects of treatments. They accepted that different diseases had differe…
You walk into the doctor with a cold. They prescribe an X-ray.
You walk in with a headache. X-ray.
Need glasses? X-ray.
Depressed? X-ray.
Imagine every time you went to the doctor, no matter what was wrong, you got the same treatment — and most times, it did nothing. Or worse, it caused more harm. Two hundred years ago in the U.S., that was about the case. Whatever your ailment, many “doctors” reached for the same handful of treatments for any condition: bloodletting, purging, opium, and few others. Come in with anything from a headache to chest pain, you’d be walking away with the same treatment.
What changed? The medical field developed evidence-based consensus around the cause of diseases and the effects of treatments. They accepted that different diseases had different causes and required different interventions at targets that may not be obvious. Called “germ theory,” early adopters of this evidence-based theory of change made doctors wash their hands, encouraged boiling unclean water, and introduced antiseptics to guard wounds against infection.
What is journalism’s germ theory? Our evidence-based, industry-wide understanding of the conditions that create information needs and the interventions that solve them? Right now, many newsrooms still reach for the same treatments no matter the issue.
Immigrants need to know their rights? Story.
Tenants can’t get their landlords to make repairs? Story.
Town council meeting? Story.
People need to know about food pantries? Story.
Sometimes stories do something. But, most of the time, they don’t.
In 2026, journalism’s theory of change will be reinvented by practitioners exploring what service means beyond the article. For The Jersey Bee, that means newsletters, directories, guides, zines, text messages, resource fairs, comedy shows, and community media training — in addition to narrative reporting.
Now in our fifth year, The Bee envisions growing to provide networked, layered information systems across the state of New Jersey, powered by our patent-pending curation system, Harvest.
And we’re not alone. Through News Futures, we’re part of a growing civic information sector moving journalism from its bloodletting era to an evidence-based social service that clearly diagnoses information needs, produces tailored products and services, measures real-world outcomes, and maintains shared protocols that integrate into other systems.
In 2026, we’ll see our field acknowledge that journalism without strategy is just storytelling. And storytelling alone isn’t public service. Claiming to address public needs without hypotheses, theories of change, and feedback loops will become a thing of the past.