This chapter explores the relationship between information exposure and trust in public institutions across LAC. It examines how individuals consume political news, evaluate information credibility, and perceive public communication, while investigating how these patterns correlate with institutional trust levels and perceptions of public governance in the region.
OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions in Latin America and the Caribbean 2025 Results
Abstract
Trust in media exceeds trust in government. 42% of Latin Americans trust news media, compared to 35% who trust national governments. . In contrast, in OECD countries, the trust levels for both institutions are equal (39%)
Social media dominates information about current affairs. 72% of respondents use social media for political news, far above the OECD average of 49%. Social validation (such as “likes” and “shares”) plays a larger role in assessing news credibility in LAC than in the OECD.
Information consumption correlates with trust. People who consume political news –regardless of source – tend to have higher trust in government. However, trust gaps between media users and non-users are narrower in LAC than in OECD countries.
Perceptions of evidence-based decision making, a crucial driver of trust in national government and the civil service, remain mixed. Only 38% believe governments use the best available evidence for policies, with strong partisan divides in perception. People with a positive view of evidence-informed decision making are significantly more likely to place high or moderately high trust in the national government, civil service and the national legislature. Likewise, less than one-quarter of respondents find official statistics trustworthy, understandable, or easy to find.
There are communication gaps on reforms and concerns about disinformation. Just 36% believe governments would clearly explain how reforms affect them personally, a perception that is moderately associated with higher trust in the national government. Individuals who feel people like them do not have a say in what government does are significantly less confident in this regard.
How can public institutions improve and foster trust?
The results of the OECD Trust Survey in LAC suggest that different measures that can be taken vis-à-vis information to enhance trust in public institutions:
Promote a healthy, diverse, and independent media environment that enables public scrutiny and informed decision making. For democracy to function effectively, a healthy information ecosystem and media literacy are essential. These elements help citizens develop "sceptical trust" - an informed, critical perspective that enhances accountability and protects democratic systems.
Enhance government transparency and communication around evidence use in decision making, including statistical governance, as it represents a powerful lever for building institutional trust. Regression analysis indicates that improving perceptions about evidence-based decision making could significantly increase trust in national government.
Implement communication strategies that clearly explain how policy reforms affect citizens to build confidence and trust. Improving government explanation of reforms is associated with increased trust in the national government.
Prioritise inclusive public communication. The Trust Survey reveals stark disparities in the perceived reach of communication based on perceived political voice and financial status. Specifically, there is a nearly 50 percentage point gap in the share who find it likely that government clearly explains how they are affected by a major reform between those who believe the political system allows people to have a say and those who do not, with a smaller 14 percentage point gap between those with and without financial concerns.
Information exposure significantly influences both the levels and nature of trust in public institutions. People form perceptions through diverse channels, including interpersonal conversations, traditional and social media consumption, and direct institutional communications. This mediated information shapes the understanding of government and public bodies, especially regarding government policies or processes which most people do not directly experience, yet which affect their trust levels (Marcinkowski and Starke, 2018[1]).
For democracy to function effectively, a healthy information ecosystem and media literacy are therefore essential. These elements enable the public to develop "sceptical trust" - an informed, critical perspective that helps protect democratic systems from disinformation threats and keep institutions accountable (Norris, 2022[2]). Several technological, economic, and political trends threaten information integrity throughout the world: the spread of misleading information, increasingly polarised communication, echo chambers, foreign influence and declining media diversity. Addressing these challenges requires developing frameworks that promote accurate, evidence-based information from diverse sources, empowering individuals to encounter varied perspectives, make informed decisions, and fully exercise their democratic rights (OECD, 2024[3]).
This chapter examines how people in Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) consume news about current affairs and government, evaluate information credibility, and form perceptions of public communication channels. It moreover investigates how these patterns relate to levels of trust in public institutions.
Trust Survey results reveal several distinctive patterns in the region. First, people trust news media (42%) more than their national governments (35%), unlike in OECD countries where trust levels are nearly equal. Second, social media dominates the current affairs and politics information landscape, with 72% of respondents using it to obtain information (compared to 49% in OECD countries). When evaluating news trustworthiness, LAC respondents tend to rely more heavily on social validation factors, such as shares and likes, than people across the OECD. Regarding public communication, most people perceive official statistics as inaccessible and doubt that governments use the best available evidence for decision making. While people are relatively satisfied with information about administrative services, they express skepticism about governments' willingness to explain how reforms would affect them personally.
Improving perceptions related to information and public communication could significantly impact trust levels in public institutions. Regression analysis of the Trust Survey results suggests that enhancing perceptions that the government draws on the best available evidence could be a potent lever to increase trust in public institutions. In LAC countries, improved perceptions on this variable are associated with an increased probability of high or moderately high trust in the national government (7.4 percentage points), with smaller but still significant positive associations with trust in the civil service (2.9 percentage points) and national legislatures (1.8 percentage points). Other aspects of public communication could also yield gains in institutional trust. Better government explanation of reforms, in turn, is associated with increased trust in the national government (1.6 percentage points).
The news media and other information sources play a pivotal role in shaping public trust towards institutions by serving as a lens through which individuals gain knowledge and assess government performance (Schäfer and Schemer, 2024[4]). When trusted and trustworthy, these sources can enable informed citizenship by providing accurate information about policies, policymakers and institutions, particularly in those areas in which audiences do not possess direct knowledge or experience. Additionally, they offer a window into other people's experiences, helping to inform a more holistic view of government performance. A robust media landscape can foster critical thinking and "sceptical trust" - allowing people to make informed judgments and hold institutions accountable, which serves as a crucial counterbalance in democratic systems (Norris, 2022[2]). Conversely, when media independence is compromised or even absent, democracy faces the danger of uninformed "blind trust" (or, conversely, “blind distrust”) in institutions.
The LAC media market on average presents a distinct landscape characterised by powerful, concentrated broadcast media. While newspaper circulation remains relatively low across the region, broadcasting emerged as a dominant force, with countries like Mexico and Brazil being among the first globally to introduce television in the early 1950s. The dominance of broadcast media profoundly shaped political culture in the region (Balutet, 2020[5]) with political discourse increasingly adapted to television criteria. LAC media markets also tend to be highly concentrated and based on a commercial model, with a few private conglomerates controlling the majority of media outlets (Mauersberger, 2015[6]; Mendel, Castillejo and Gómez, 2017[7]; Mastrini, n.d.[8]).
Despite the high concentration of media markets in the region, on average, 42% of people report high or moderately high trust in news media, slightly higher than the OECD average of 39% (Figure 5.1). Countries like Mexico, Paraguay, and the Dominican Republic show the highest levels of trust, with approximately half of their populations expressing confidence in news media. Conversely, Chile demonstrates the lowest trust levels at only 28%.
Overall trust in news media (42%) is higher than trust in national governments (35%) across the region (See Figure 1.6 in Chapter 1). In contrast, in OECD countries, the trust levels for both institutions are equal (39%). This gap is more pronounced in countries like Guatemala and Paraguay, where only 27% of citizens trust their respective government, while 46% and 49% trust media.
Share of population who indicate different levels of trust in news media, 2023 or 2025
Note: The figure shows the within-country distributions of responses to the question “On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not at all and 10 is completely, how much do you trust the news media?”. A 0-4 response corresponds to ‘low or no trust’, a 5 to ‘neutral’ and a 6-10 to ‘high or moderately high trust’. OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
Results from the OECD Trust Survey suggest people in LAC countries have patterns of media consumption distinct from the OECD for information on politics and current affairs, with a particularly strong reliance on social media (Figure 5.2). Social media is the dominant, with 72% of respondents stating that they use this source for gaining information on politics and current affairs on a regular basis, compared to 49% across the OECD. Based on respondents' self-reported estimates of what percentage of their total political and current affairs information comes from social media, people in LAC countries also demonstrate a markedly higher reliance on social media as a news source (55%) compared to people in OECD countries (34%) (Figure 5.3).
Traditional news media (TV/radio) remains important across LAC and the OECD, though usage today is much higher in OECD countries (71%) compared to LAC (60%). Print and online newspapers also show a notable difference, with people in OECD countries reporting higher consumption (52%) than in LAC countries (36%). These findings align with the structure of the media market in the region, characterised by weakly developed newspaper sectors and strongly developed broadcasting markets (Hallin and Echeverria, 2025[9]).
Looking more closely at individual countries nevertheless reveals a degree of heterogeneity in the region. Colombia has the highest reliance on TV/radio news (73%), while the Dominican Republic shows the lowest (49%). Guatemala leads in social media usage for political information (78%). Across all surveyed countries, very few respondents (around 2% in LAC) report receiving no political information at all.
Share of population who indicate that they get information about politics and current affairs from respective source, 2023 or 2025
Note: The shares are derived from the response to the question “On a typical day, from which of the following sources, if any, do you get information about politics and current affairs?”. Respondents were able to select all responses that applied. OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
Share of information obtained through social media among respondents who use social media for information about politics and current affairs, 2023 or 2025
Note: The share shows the average share of responses to the question “What percentage of information on politics and current affairs do you get from social media (Facebook, X, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, reddit etc.)?”. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
The Trust Survey reveals distinct age-related patterns in media consumption across LAC countries that occasionally diverge from OECD trends (Figure 5.4). Older generations (50+) in LAC countries consume significantly more television and radio news than younger demographics – a pattern consistent with global trends. Similarly, newspaper and online news website usage increases with age in both LAC and OECD countries. However, LAC countries exhibit much narrower generational gaps in social media use for political information compared to OECD countries, where social media consumption decreases sharply with age. This suggests a more uniform adoption of digital platforms across age groups in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Share of population in respective age group who indicate that they get information about politics and current affairs from respective source, 2023 or 2025
Note: The shares are derived from the response to the question “On a typical day, from which of the following sources, if any, do you get information about politics and current affairs?”. Respondents were able to select all responses that applied. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
In LAC countries, higher levels of information consumption generally correlate with increased government trust, regardless of the media source. This contrasts with OECD countries, where consumers of traditional media (especially newspapers) show significantly higher trust in government (Figure 5.5). Government trust levels show minimal difference between social media users and non-users in LAC on average. Similarly, little difference not. Consumers of traditional media (TV, radio, and print) show somewhat higher trust in government, though this difference is smaller in the LAC context than the OECD average. The most significant trust gap exists between information seekers and non-seekers, yet even this disparity is smaller than typical OECD patterns.
Share with high or moderately high trust in the national government by whether they obtain information about politics or current affairs from the named source, 2023 or 2025
Note: The figure shows the share with high or moderately high trust in the national government, depending on whether they use the media or information source about politics and current affairs on a typical day. The share with high or moderately high trust corresponds to respondents who select an answer from 6 to 10 to the question “On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not at all and 10 is completely, how much do you trust the national government?”. Whether or not the respondent uses the selected source of information is derived from their answer(s) to the question “On a typical day, from which of the following sources, if any, do you get information about politics and current affairs?”, for which they can select all options that apply. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the 10 LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
The data were further analysed to compare information source preferences and governance perception scores between LAC and OECD countries across six areas (Figure 5.6). From this analysis, three findings emerge. First, people who avoid political information consistently hold more negative views of governance across all drivers in both LAC and across the OECD. Second, the perception gap between informed and uninformed people is significantly smaller in LAC countries than in OECD countries. This is especially evident in views of government reliability, openness, fairness, and integrity. Third, integrity perceptions show the closest alignment between informed and uninformed people in both LAC and the OECD, with the smallest perception gaps compared to other governance drivers.
Share of population expressing confidence in different public governance dimensions (average across survey questions) by source of information about politics and current affairs, 2023 and 2025
Note: The figure presents the unweighted averages of “likely” responses across all survey questions related to “reliability” (3 questions), “responsiveness” (4 questions), “integrity” (4 questions), “openness” (4 questions), “fairness” (3 questions), and “complex and/or global challenges” (2 questions) (see Annex 1A) by source of information about politics and current affairs. The share of ‘’likely’’ correspond to those who select an answer from 6 to 10 on the 0-10 response scale, grouped by five sources of information about politics and current affairs: TV or radio; social media; newspapers, magazines or online news websites; conversation with others; and prefer not getting any information. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
The digital transformation of societies has reshaped how people interact and engage with information. Efforts to adapt to these changes and build trust require a focus on strengthening information integrity and upholding freedom of opinion and expression (OECD, 2024[10]). Targeted information manipulation and interference campaigns that attempt to undermine trust in democracy and increase societal divisions can reduce societies’ abilities to build consensus on policy challenges and can undermine trust in democratic processes more widely (OECD, 2024[11]). Despite these trends, the OECD Trust Survey in LAC indicates that 7% of respondents identify misinformation and disinformation as a top three issue facing their country, with people in Brazil showing higher levels of concern at 10%.
Traditionally, high-quality and public interest media and journalism have played a critical role in promoting transparency and freedom of expression. According to the World Press Freedom Index, journalism across the LAC region faces severe structural and economic challenges, including media concentration, weak public outlets, increased vulnerabilities to editorial independence, and precarious or at times hostile working conditions for journalists (RSF, 2025[12]). Brazil has gained 47 places on the ranking since 2022, though Costa Rica stands as the only LAC country with a "satisfactory" situation according to the WPF Index. These issues are magnified by declining public trust in traditional media and citizens’ increasing reliance on social media for news. This situation has contributed to changing consumption habits across LAC countries, leading to shrinking newsrooms and significant challenges to the media’s business model. The Trust Survey provides insights into how people assess news credibility in this complex landscape.
In LAC countries, people evaluate the trustworthiness of news items using a wide range of criteria. Sources cited in news items were the most reported criterion for trustworthiness, mentioned by 48% of people. This is followed by who reports the story (43%), the number of organisations reporting (41%), and who shares the story (40%). Less frequently cited factors include the number of shares and likes on online platforms (20%) and whether they agree with the point of view presented (15%) (Figure 5.7). When comparing LAC countries to OECD averages, notable differences emerge: A larger though still minority share of respondents in the region places importance on interpersonal and social media indicators like the number of shares/likes (20% vs 9% in OECD) and who shares the story (40% vs 35% in OECD). This suggests that social validation plays a more prominent role in news assessment across LAC compared to OECD countries. These findings however may also reflect the fact that people in LAC countries rely more on social media to obtain news on politics and current affairs, as described in the previous section.
Share that selected the named factor as mattering the most in deciding whether the news is trustworthy, 2023 or 2025
Note: Each share corresponds to the unweighted averages of the response to the question “When you read, watch or hear news, which of the following factors matter the most to you in deciding whether the news is trustworthy?”. Respondents were able to choose up to three response options. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
Strengthening information integrity also requires concerted efforts to enhance individuals’ understanding of – and skills to operate in – modern information environments. Media and information literacy (MIL) can be a useful tool to help build this understanding. Specifically, media and information literacy refer to a set of skills and competencies that enable citizens to critically, effectively, and responsibly access, understand, use, and engage with information and media, both online and off-line (OECD, 2024[10])
UNESCO's 2023 mapping of MIL initiatives in Ibero-America offers a regional snapshot of ongoing initiatives (UNESCO, 2023[13]): 50% of Latin American and Caribbean territories have implemented specific MIL regulations, though resource allocation remains limited. Over the past three years, there has been an exponential increase in initiatives. These programmes have primarily targeted children, teachers, and families, with growing emphasis on adult education, and primarily involve direct collaboration between regulatory bodies and educational institutions or community groups.
Emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI) systems, present new and evolving opportunities and challenges across information environments (OECD, 2024[10]). Over-reliance on AI can allow systemic errors to propagate (OECD, 2025[14]). AI tools can also enable the creation of increasingly credible-looking texts, images, audio, and video ‘recordings’, undermining a shared reality and enabling an environment where genuine evidence of misconduct can be dismissed as AI-generated fakes, weakening citizen trust.
While generative AI has the potential to create convincing misleading content across multiple media formats, its impact on recent elections in the LAC has been assessed to have been relatively limited (Becker Castellaro et al., 2025[15]). This may be attributed to both the novelty of widespread generative AI tools and the fact that effective information manipulation requires more than just convincing content – it needs distribution networks, amplification mechanisms and receptive audiences.
In today's increasingly fragmented information landscape, public communication plays a vital role in building and maintaining trust in public institutions. Public institutions must develop innovative communication strategies that effectively reach people with relevant, relatable, and trustworthy information. Public communication serves to strengthen institutional trust by increasing transparency about government actions, enhancing service delivery through information exchange, and demonstrating commitment to core democratic values, including openness, integrity, and fairness. Public institutions function as direct information sources through websites, campaigns, and press events, and as indirect sources when officials engage with journalists and other information intermediaries. This multifaceted "exchange of information between government and people, and the dialogue that ensues from it" is core to rebuilding trust (OECD, 2021[16]).
A key facet of this exchange of information in democracies is to ensure the understanding and rationale behind policy decisions and public actions. In LAC countries, 38% of people believe their governments make evidence-based decisions, slightly lower than the OECD average of 41%. Mexico and Ecuador stand out positively with the highest scores of 49% and 48%, respectively (Figure 5.8). Regression analysis of the Trust Survey Results suggests that improving perceptions that the government draws on the best available evidence could be a potent lever to increase levels of trust in public institutions. In LAC countries, improved perceptions on this variable are associated with increased levels of trust in national government (7.4 percentage points), and smaller but still significant positive effects on trust in civil service (2.9 percentage points), and national legislatures (1.8 percentage points) (see Annex A). However, achieving these improvements is not without challenges.
Share of population who find it likely or unlikely that government takes decisions based on evidence, 2023 or 2025
Note: The figure shows the within-country distributions of responses to the question: “If the national government takes a decision, how likely do you think it is that it will draw on the best available evidence, research, and statistical data?” The “likely” proportion is the aggregation of responses from 6-10 on the scale; “neutral” is equal to a response of 5; “unlikely” is the aggregation of responses from 1-4; and “don't know” was a separate answer choice. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
However, these perceptions are influenced by political affiliation: across all countries, those who voted (or would have voted) for a party currently in power consistently show higher confidence in evidence-based decision making compared to those who did not. For instance, in Ecuador, government supporters are almost twice as likely (59% vs 31%) to believe decisions are evidence-based compared to opposition voters. Similar patterns emerge in the Dominican Republic (59% vs 28%) and Paraguay (39% vs 21%). This partisan divide in perceptions of evidence use underlines how important it is to distinguish political communication from public communication (OECD, 2021[16]). Government institutions benefit from clear guidelines to separate official public communications from political messaging and should provide ways for civil servants to report any concerns about the neutrality of messaging efforts.
Government statistics are one way in which public institutions can provide citizens, businesses, and organisations with a foundation for understanding economic, social, and policy developments. The OECD Recommendation on Good Statistical Practice emphasises the need for professional independence of national statistical authorities, commitment to quality standards in statistical outputs and processes, and user-friendly data access and dissemination to ensure statistics are accessible, understandable, and available in machine-readable formats with appropriate metadata and guidance [OECD/LEGAL/0417]. However, Trust Survey results from the LAC region reveal significant challenges in public trust of these statistics. Only 23% of respondents believe government statistics are easy to find, 27% find them understandable, 21% consider they allow people to verify whether the government keeps its promises, and 24% view them as trustworthy (Figure 5.9). A high percentage of neutral and “don’t know” responses however suggest widespread lack of awareness of or interest in official statistics.
Share of population reporting different assessments of the characteristics of statistics provided by government institutions, 2023 or 2025
Note: The figure presents the averages for the distribution of responses to the four sub-questions of the question “In general, would you say that government institutions (such as ministries and the national statistical office) provide statistics that…trustworthy/easy to understand/easy to find/allow you to verify whether the government keeps its promises.” The ‘satisfied’ category includes respondents who stated that this was always or often the case, the ‘neutral’ those who stated this was sometimes the case and the ‘dissatisfied’ category those who said that it was rarely or never the case. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
Beyond communicating on the use of evidence, improvements around communication on the expected effects of reforms could likewise yield gains in trust in the national government. People who find it likely that government clearly explains how they will be affected by a major reform are 1.6 percentage points more likely to place high or moderately high trust in the national government1.
People in LAC typically express higher levels of satisfaction with administrative or routine aspects of public communication. Results from the Trust Survey indicate 57% believe clear information about administrative services is readily available, though this falls below the OECD average of 67% (Figure 5.10). This type of communication serves as both an essential public service and an integral part of the user journey. However, as is the case for people in OECD countries, people are more sceptical about government's ability or willingness to explain how they may be affected by a policy reform. Only 36% of people in LAC countries (compared to 39% across the OECD) believe their government would clarify how reforms would affect them personally, while 44% believe their government would not provide such explanations (Figure 5.10).
Share of population who find it likely that the national government would clearly explain how the respondent would be affected by a reform and that information about administrative services is easily available, 2023 or 2025
Note: The figure presents the within-country distributions of “likely” responses (aggregation of responses from 6-10 on the 0-10 scale) to the questions “If the national government was carrying out a reform, how likely do you think it is that it would clearly explain how you will be affected by the reform?” and “If you needed information about an administrative service (for example obtaining a passport, registering a birth, applying for benefits, etc.), how likely do you think it is that clear information would be easily available?”. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC
Data from the OECD Trust Survey in LAC reveal significant disparities in different socio-demographic groups’ perceptions of whether the government would clearly explain how a new reform would affect them in LAC countries (Figure 5.11). Most strikingly, there is a nearly 50 percentage point gap between those who believe the political system allows people to have a say (70 % feel the government would clearly explain reforms) and those who do not (only 21 % believe the same). People who self-identify as belonging to a discriminated group are also less likely to believe the government would clearly explain reforms (32%) compared to those who do not feel they experience discrimination (39%), a gap similar to what is observed across OECD countries; while the gap between those without financial concerns (48 %) versus those with financial concerns (34%) is more pronounced in the region than across the OECD. Age, gender, and education show smaller gaps in reform communication perceptions. Although the gaps are on par or smaller than what is found on average across OECD countries, these findings suggest government communication strategies need significant improvement to reach disadvantaged groups and those disconnected from political processes, especially when explaining how complex reforms would affect different populations.
Share of respective group who find it likely that the national government would clearly explain how the respondent would be affected, 2023 or 2025
Note: The figure presents the unweighted averages across OECD/LAC countries of responses to the question "“If the national government was carrying out a reform, how likely do you think it is that it would clearly explain how you will be affected by the reform?” by respondents’ perceptions of political agency, partisanship, socio-economic background and demographic characteristics. Shown here is the proportion that respond “like” based on the aggregation of responses from 6-10 on the 0-10 response scale, grouped by respondents’ perceptions that people like them have a say in what government does, and partisanship (voted or would have voted for government during last national elections), socio-economic background (financial concerns, education) and demographic characteristics (gender, age). Financial concerns are measured by asking ‘’In general, thinking about the next year or two, how concerned are you about your household's finances and overall social and economic well-being?’’ and aggregating responses 3 (somewhat concerned) and 4 (very concerned). “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
Effective public communication is a fundamental for securing public acceptance of policy reforms, requiring a strategic approach that balances several key factors. Successful communication strategies should be built upon a clear electoral mandate, credible government promises about reform effectiveness, and assurances regarding compensation for those negatively affected (OECD, 2010[17]; Reynolds et al., 2020[18]). . To better reach its desired audience, public communication should be easy to understand (for instance, using tools like online calculators for reforms with variable impacts), inclusive (reaching diverse linguistic and societal groups with tailored messaging), responsive (demonstrating understanding of citizens' concerns and enabling a two-way dialogue), and compelling enough to cut through today's complex information landscape (OECD, 2024[19]; OECD, 2010[17]).
References
[5] Balutet, N. (2020), “Télévision et politique spectacle: l’exemple chilien”, Dígitos. Revista de Comunicación Digital 6, pp. 239-252, https://doi.org/10.7203/RD.V1I6.164.
[15] Becker Castellaro, S. et al. (2025), “Artificial Intelligence and Information Integrity: Latin American experiences. Policy Paper No. 34, 2025”, https://doi.org/10.31752/IDEA.2025.39.
[9] Hallin, D. and M. Echeverria (2025), “Media systems in Latin America”, in The Routledge Handbook of Political Communication in Ibero-America, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin-Echeverria/publication/384134295_Media_systems_in_Latin_America/links/674de0e8f309a268c01e4c4b/Media-systems-in-Latin-America.pdf?origin=publication_detail&_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uRG93bmxvYWQiLCJwcmV2aW91c1BhZ2UiOiJwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiJ9fQ&__cf_chl_tk=eaLxbsJ9q72eDYSdX6cc7nBe55R29T4mswFYvryUCkE-1753786898-1.0.1.1-H00g5xblUH_yIUWytVRzJQeJMxaA1D8cIJt4.2wQFgE (accessed on 29 July 2025).
[1] Marcinkowski, F. and C. Starke (2018), “Trust in government: What’s news media got to do with it?”, Studies in Communication Sciences, Vol. 18/1, pp. 87-102, https://doi.org/10.24434/j.scoms.2018.01.006.
[8] Mastrini, G. (n.d.), “More Owners than Ever”, Global Media Journal, Vol. 17/32, https://www.academia.edu/download/96575826/more-owners-than-ever-concentration-in-the-latin-americancommunication-landscape-of-the-21st-century.pdf (accessed on 29 July 2025).
[6] Mauersberger, C. (2015), “Advocacy coalitions and democratizing media reforms in Latin America: Whose voice gets on the air?”, Advocacy Coalitions and Democratizing Media Reforms in Latin America: Whose Voice Gets on the Air?, pp. 1-275, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21278-4/COVER.
[7] Mendel, T., Á. Castillejo and G. Gómez (2017), Concentration of media ownership and freedom of expression: global standards and implications for the Americas, UNESCO, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/in/documentViewer.xhtml?v=2.1.196&id=p::usmarcdef_0000248091&file=/in/rest/annotationSVC/DownloadWatermarkedAttachment/attach_import_f577db9e-bf64-4724-ba50-be797dc87057%3F_%3D248091eng.pdf&locale=en&multi=true&ark=/ark:/48223/pf0000248091/PDF/248091eng.pdf#%5B%7B%22num%22%3A73%2C%22gen%22%3A0%7D%2C%7B%22name%22%3A%22XYZ%22%7D%2C0%2C842%2Cnull%5D (accessed on 29 July 2025).
[2] Norris, P. (2022), In Praise of Skepticism, Oxford University Press.
[14] OECD (2025), Governing with Artificial Intelligence: The State of Play and Way Forward in Core Government Functions, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/795de142-en.
[3] OECD (2024), Facts not Fakes: Tackling Disinformation, Strengthening Information Integrity, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d909ff7a-en.
[19] OECD (2024), Lessons from the 2023 OECD Trust Survey in Slovenia, Building Trust in Public Institutions, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/261ac7b2-en.
[11] OECD (2024), OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions – 2024 Results: Building Trust in a Complex Policy Environment, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9a20554b-en.
[10] OECD (2024), Recommendation of the Council on Information Integrity, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0505.
[16] OECD (2021), OECD Report on Public Communication: The Global Context and the Way Forward, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/22f8031c-en.
[17] OECD (2010), Making Reform Happen: Lessons from OECD Countries, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264086296-en.
[18] Reynolds, J. et al. (2020), “Communicating the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of government policies and their impact on public support: a systematic review with meta-analysis”, Royal Society Open Science, Vol. 7/1, https://doi.org/10.1098/RSOS.190522.
[12] RSF (2025), 2025 World Press Freedom Index - The Americas, https://rsf.org/en/classement/2025/americas (accessed on 30 July 2025).
[4] Schäfer, S. and C. Schemer (2024), “Informed participation? An investigation of the relationship between exposure to different news channels and participation mediated through actual and perceived knowledge”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 14, p. 1251379, https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2023.1251379.
[13] UNESCO (2023), Mapping of media and information literacy initiatives in Ibero-America, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000390030_eng (accessed on 29 July 2025).
← 1. There is also a weak association between positive perceptions of the availability of information about administrative services and trust in local government. However, the marginal effect is only 1.1 percentage point, and it is only statistically significant at the 10% level.