Tara Palmeri on why journalism’s future is independent
Jan 22, 2026 [[read-time]] minute read
From the halls of the White House to the front pages of the New York Post, Tara Palmeri has spent two decades at the center of the news cycle. But in 2025, she made her boldest move yet: trading the polished constraints of legacy newsrooms for the gritty, conversational freedom of YouTube.
By launching The Tara Palmeri Show, she isn't just changing platforms—she’s redefining the role of a journalist. Focusing on "the middle" of the political spectrum, Palmeri is proving that high-stakes reporting is possible on a different platform. Her success signals a new era where the quality of the scoop matters more than the origin of the broadcast. We spoke with Tara about why YouTube is the only place her new show could live.
You’ve worked at some really big places—Politico, ABC News, the New York Post. Was there a lightbulb moment when you realized YouTube was the right home for this next chapter rather than a major network or a major publication?
When I went home and I saw my dad watching YouTube on TV. Even when I hosted my podcast on The Ringer, it seemed like all of the big shows were on YouTube and I was still audio-only, and I felt like I was behind. It just felt like the momentum and all of the action was happening on YouTube, especially in the news space. I thought if traditional organizations are not ready to go there, then I need to go there and I’ve got to be brave enough to go on my own and do it. For me it's like, if a tree falls and no one hears it, who cares? So if you have news and you're breaking it and no one hears it, then what's the point? You want to go where the biggest audience is and where the people are the most connected.
“Independent journalists tend to focus less on access journalism and that can be a dangerous thing for institutions that use it to control the message. And that’s a good thing for journalism and for holding power to account.”
You’ve talked about wanting to speak to the "underdeveloped territory in the middle." How do you define that audience, and why do you think others are currently failing to reach them?
I have used the word "the middle" and there was a part of me that thought, maybe that wasn't the right word. I'm thinking of people who are more open-minded and more independent and willing to kind of consider all perspectives, less silo-driven. We have become so tribal. I really want to break down those silos and I want to have discussions, interviews, and reporting that helps people see the world a little bit differently. On YouTube, the comments make it interactive. We engage, we talk, I hear from the audience. That’s a really big part of it for me.
How does removing the "anchor voice" change the way your audience trusts the information that you give them?
If you really want to build a community and a relationship, you have to drop the veneer and you have to just be explicit—show the process. You can be open about what you know and what you don't know, which is something that we are told in journalism not to do. People will trust you more when they see how the sausage is made.
Independent journalists are increasingly being discussed for News Emmy nominations. Is the industry ready to recognize you alongside traditional network correspondents?
I hope so. We’re doing important work that is often missed by the mainstream. I’ve seen my own YouTube work featured on ABC, Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN, so they clearly think it’s valuable enough to feature on their networks. I do think that it's time to acknowledge the people who are breaking the news, who are the trusted sources. If you don't acknowledge independent journalists, you’re basically missing two-thirds of the news ecosystem.
Moving from a salary to a creator model is daunting. How do you ensure the need for engagement doesn't interfere with your reporting integrity?
You just have to put integrity first, but it is hard. You’re constantly feeding algorithms, and sometimes I have to remind myself that a story takes time—especially investigative work. You have to be okay with the fact that every day may not be a smashing success and remember it’s a long game.
“We have become so tribal. I really want to break down those silos and I want to have discussions, interviews, and reporting that helps people see the world a little bit differently.”
Why do you believe independent journalism is more effective at holding power to account than traditional newsrooms?
When you’re an independent journalist, there’s no bureau chief or editor for lawmakers or heads of institutions to call and complain about your reporting. Independent journalists tend to focus less on access journalism and that can be a dangerous thing for institutions that use it to control the message. And that’s a good thing for journalism and for holding power to account. I don’t play the access game – access journalism is a slippery slope. It’s why a lot of stories don't get covered in mainstream news. If you don’t hold the people you interview to the rigors of journalism, you’re missing the point. You have to ask the tough questions for the people watching, who don’t get the opportunity to ask the tough questions.