By Selma Stern, Independent Advisor, and Pete Doucette, Senior Managing Director, Mather

Hypothesis 1: Structural tailwinds

First, Google’s AI Overviews reached US audiences at scale well before it landed on European ones. German publishers simply had more runway. Second, Android’s share of the German mobile market is high, and Android means more Google Discover. That traffic converts less reliably than search, but it feeds reach, programmatic inventory and brand.

More broadly, US and German markets are arguably at different points on the digital disruption maturity curve — every new wave of digital disruption has hit the US sooner and often harder. However, this does not explain the relative strength of German regionals.

Hypothesis 2: Spending from strength, not desperation

German legacy businesses are still somewhat healthy, allowing sustained investment in digital products. “German publishers still continue to have a very good print business when compared to the United States,” Piechota observes. “They have a war chest.” That buys the ability to invest in new models while the old one is still paying the bills, rather than aggressively cutting costs.

The result is newsroom scale — bigger teams, more original reporting, deeper local coverage, the inputs that make a brand worth returning to. Many US publishers, further into the contraction, are increasingly forced to choose survival over reinvention. German publishers, for now, don’t have to. The key differentiator here might be ownership structure. While financial investors drove consolidation in the US market, private and strategic ownership is much more common in Germany, especially on the regional level.

Hypothesis 3: Collaboration over consolidation

This is a playbook that could be adapted to other markets.

Consolidation happened in both markets we analyzed, but for different reasons and in different ways. In the US, large groups acquired local titles, often through debt, to extract short-term financial gains without making long-term investments. In Germany, publishers are pooling resources to invest, not just to economize. German publishers acquire one another too — Madsack, for instance, has made several acquisitions in recent years — but consolidation here tends to fund investment rather than strip costs, and on the technology layer the instinct is to collaborate rather than buy.

As Alexandra Borchardt, one of the sharpest observers of the German market, told us, regional publishers in Germany have “allied with one another to wrestle collectively with the future of the industry” — joining media groups to create synergies rather than simply to cut costs.

You can see the machinery behind that: Madsack’s shared RND content network, Ippen’s central editorial network, dpa’s DRIVE data collaboration, the agile newsroom muscle built across WAN-IFRA’s Table Stakes Europe, where, in Borchardt’s words, regional publishers “learned together how to identify and serve their audiences.”

“They collaborate on technology projects,” says Piechota — “a very innovative way to solve a common problem: how to invest in new technology while the old business is contracting.” German regionals compete on the newsstand and collaborate on the platform layer.

Hypothesis 4: Trust and depth beat reach

German audience numbers recovered inside the same platform and AI environment the US operates in. When two markets share the conditions and diverge this sharply, the variable isn’t the platform, but the audience relationship.

According to the Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2025, 45% of Germans trust “most news, most of the time,” while in the US this measure sits at 30%. The same report finds Germans still rely on local newspapers as their main source for the major categories of local news, where in the US those have largely shifted to local TV and social platforms.

Our benchmark’s engagement data backs this up. German growth looks like it’s driven by habit, not news spikes: repeat visitation, depth, loyalty. The German story, therefore, isn’t so much about winning new users as it is about getting more from the users you already have. That’s a function of product and trust — what Borchardt calls journalism’s “strong anchoring in society.”

German publishers, Piechota argues, “can do things American publishers no longer can,” with local coverage often more in-depth than its US equivalent. Growth is concentrating among differentiated, high-loyalty brands — which is exactly why independent regionals, the most distinctive of the lot, are leading the recovery.

So what (for everyone else)?

Strip out the “luck” and the German playbook is portable. The luck was in timing, devices and ownership structures. The rest was and, importantly, still is down to choices: invest while you can, collaborate on expensive, undifferentiated back-end solutions and compete on the rest, and build the kind of trusted, in-depth product that turns a visit into a habit.

Borchardt encourages German publishers to stop “looking to America in awe and anxiety,” and instead “lean on their own strengths.” The US decline is real, but it is not a forecast for everyone. German publishers looked at the same disruption and handled it successfully.

Germany did get lucky: later AI search, more Discover, healthier balance sheets. But that’s not all. German regional publishers chose collaboration and a relentless focus on quality. They indeed did something with their luck.

Selma Stern is a strategic advisor helping media leaders transform their organizations for sustainable growth, drawing on 15+ years of experience in consulting and global news media. In particular, Selma bridges the gap between high-level strategy and the messy reality of execution, helping publishers fix the internal structures that hold them back.

In this article, Selma shares 5 recommendations for surviving in this gap as a subscription leader:
- Accept your real job: consensus builder, not decision maker
- Master internal storytelling
- Build cross-functional infrastructure
- Invest in human chemistry
- Give away the credit