The data supporting constructive journalism is beginning to speak for itself. Media studies and anecdotal evidence show that audiences engage with constructive journalism more deeply than they do with traditional reporting. Trust levels are higher as well as engagement rates. Higher trust and more engagement keeps readers loyal and attracts new ones, which can boost an outlet’s bottom line. The studies carried out so far are based in the US and Europe, but many results should be applicable to other regions.  

• More sharing with constructive stories: Negative headlines might get more clicks, but constructive stories are shared more often.
• Stronger ties with audiences: Readers of solutions stories say they would read more articles from the journalist who wrote the article or the newspaper which published it.
• Higher youth engagement: Younger audiences in particular are more engaged with solutions stories than traditional ones. A BBC survey of young online audiences found that 64% of people under 35 wanted solutions-oriented news. 
• Potential to win over “indifferent audiences”: For an untrusting public, the issue is indifference rather than hostility. To win these people over, the Reuters Institute recommends moving beyond just reporting on the intricacies of daily politics as well as covering the good along with the bad – just what a constructive approach does.
• Psychological Boost: A 2014 experiment conducted by researchers at the University of Texas’s Engaging News Project found that readers of solutions-oriented stories reported higher levels of self-efficacy, optimism and agency as compared to readers of non-solutions stories. That result was replicated in a 2016 study. 
• Spending more time and more money: News consumers spend more time with constructive stories and seem more willing to spend money on subscriptions and memberships. However, more long-term research is needed to draw a definitive link between a constructive approach and stronger revenue streams.