Daily Dose
Daily Dose was a concept test exploring a new, more manageable and engaging way for young people to consume news. The concept offered one editorially selected news story per day, accompanied by an explanation of why the story was chosen, opportunities to interact with the content, and a positive reward after engagement.
The project was designed to address three challenges associated with young peoples’ news consumption: information overload, feelings of powerlessness, and passive news consumption. Through a simple prototype tested with 10 young people aged 18–25 in Stockholm, we explored whether a limited and curated news format could make news feel more manageable, relevant and meaningful; whether transparency around news selection could increase understanding and trust; and whether interaction and rewards could encourage more active engagement with news.
PROJECT ELEMENTS IN SHORT
Concept and test design: Defined the core elements of Daily Dose to test, developed the research questions, and designed the overall test setup and interview guide.
Prototype development: Developed a web-based prototype delivering one curated news story per day, including a “Why this story?” explanation, opportunities to interact with the content, and a positive reward after engagement. The original prototype idea came from the project Trust Sprint.
Content curation: Selected and prepared the news stories used during the test, with the same daily story delivered to all participants.
One-week concept test: Tested the prototype with 10 young people aged 18–25 in Stockholm over one week.
User research: Conducted semi-structured interviews with participants to explore their experience of the format, relevance, transparency around news selection, interactions, rewards, and the overall news experience.
Analysis and synthesis: Analysed the findings to identify which elements of Daily Dose showed potential, what created friction, and what could inform future product development.
The aim was not to validate Daily Dose as a finished product, but to generate early insights into which elements of the concept showed potential for future product development.
FINDINGS FROM USER TESTING
News Fatigue Is About Friction, Not Volume
For several participants, feeling overwhelmed by news was less about the sheer amount of information than about the work required to begin: deciding what mattered, finding a source they considered impartial, and making time to look. Faced with those choices, some described turning instead to social media because it was easier. A curated, single-story format reduced that starting effort by taking away the need to decide where to go and what to read first.
This does not mean that volume was irrelevant to everyone. One participant said news felt difficult because it was too dense, while another said the challenge was the energy of actively seeking impartial news rather than feeling overwhelmed. Across these accounts, the strongest shared value was a bounded, low-effort entry point that made it easier to start a news routine.
Supporting participant quotes
Woman, 22: “I think it's a habit that's hard to build, and it can be a little bit overwhelming sometimes when there's so much different news and you don't know what's important to read and where to read news from.”
Woman, 22: “It simplified this whole thing of not knowing where to get information from and feeling overwhelmed by a lot of information. It made everything simpler because you didn't have to do all of that decision-making and figure out where to get information from or what's important. It did that work for you.”
Woman, 24: “For me personally, it’s not about whether news is overwhelming. Rather, I have to sit down and actively look for impartial news that isn’t fed to me because the algorithm knows I’m interested in that particular thing. That takes energy, and it becomes easier for me to go on social media instead.”
Woman, 22: “The threshold wasn’t very high for me to click into the app, because I knew it would go fairly quickly and was only one minute. It didn’t feel difficult to do.”
Man, 23: “I think more people struggle with news being too dense than with there being too much news.”
People Want Curation, But They Don't Trust the Curator
Participants saw a real benefit in receiving a story they would not have selected themselves. They were wary of choosing news only by personal interest because that could keep them within familiar topics. A single curated story could expose them to something they had not searched for and shift attention beyond their usual choices.
That value came with a clear concern about the power of the selector. When one story represents the day’s news, participants wanted to understand who had selected it, whether there was an angle, what sources supported it, and why it was important. A short explanation of why a story had been chosen could make the selection feel purposeful rather than random, while still leaving people attentive to its evidence and framing.
Supporting participant quotes
Man, 21: “I don't want to be able to pick my interests, because then it makes me learn more about the things that I already know about. I'd rather get a piece of information that I don't get to choose.”
Woman, 22: “I don’t think I would want to choose what I’m interested in. I feel it isn’t up to me to decide the most important news; someone else should do that.”
Man, 21: “One fear that I had was the control of the media that you’re giving a news agency when you have a single piece of news that they’re selecting for people to read. … It’s scary in some senses as well.”
Woman, 22: “Who is behind this? Do they have an angle? It’s a little scary that you can steer the only news I get to see and frame what is important. It would be important for me to know who the sources are, I think, and what your purpose is.”
Woman, 22: “I didn't feel like it was just random news that I was getting handed, but it was selected for some purpose.”
Rewards Ease the News, But Don't Drive the Habit
For some participants, the reward or action layer changed the emotional experience of difficult news. A meal donation, in particular, was understood as a direct and concrete act of contribution. It could leave people feeling less disheartened by negative news, or give them a modest sense of hope and agency after engaging with it.
The reward did not have one consistent effect on returning to the service. Some participants said it made them want to come back, while others described it as an extra that did not affect how they used the concept. The kind of impact also mattered: funding journalism was still considered important, but it felt more abstract than providing a meal; for one participant, the reward framing itself felt patronising.
Supporting participant quotes
Woman, 22: “I think it definitely made me want to come back again the next day. Because I felt like I get something good out of it, [and] someone else can get something good out of it.”
Woman, 26: “The reward was the little extra for me. It meant that you did not feel so bad about hearing negative news when you knew that you had made a difference in some way.”
Woman, 22: “I still think it gives hope: you can feel that you are contributing something in a very simple way.”
Woman, 24: “I do not know if it motivated me that much; rather, it left a good taste in my mouth afterwards.”
Man, 20: “It still feels like something important, but at the same time more abstract. You do not see a child in front of you who needs food; it is harder to grasp in the same way.”
Man, 23: “It feels a bit like you are being treated as if you are stupid: ‘You managed to focus for two minutes; here is your reward.’”
Video Gets People In, Then They Want to Read More
Participants did not describe short video as a substitute for depth. Instead, the one-minute clip often worked as a low-friction visual entry point: it gave enough context to create interest, then prompted several people to read the article or look for more information. The video’s value was in making it easy to start with a topic, rather than in answering every question on its own.
Once participants had started, their appetite for depth and breadth differed. Some wanted the fuller article to understand the topic properly; some also wanted several more stories to feel broadly informed. Others valued the discipline of one curated story because it limited topic-hopping and exposed them to news outside their own preferences. The format therefore met different needs at different points: a simple start, followed by varying desires for more.
Supporting participant quotes
Woman, 22: “I often found that I became more curious after the clip and wanted to learn more about what was happening. It was a great way to spark my interest in a topic, and I could spend five more minutes reading about it.”
Woman, 25: “Because I had a summarised video, I became more interested and really read everything. I do not think that would have happened with many articles if I had not seen a video first.”
Man, 21: “Most of the time I was reading more. The videos were interesting, so I had to look more into it because the videos are kind of surface level. It is nice to read the full article.”
Man, 23: “I personally would not use it mainly because it is one news story a day. If it were perhaps five or ten, I would feel that I got a broader perspective. That is what is important to me in news.”
Woman, 25: “Maybe one [main story], but perhaps two extra ones that really cover everything that has happened; then I would really feel that I had checked the news and knew what had happened in Sweden or internationally.”
Man, 21: “I valued the way that it was presented in terms of it being one curated news piece a day. I do not want to be able to pick my interests, because that makes me learn more about the things I already know about.”
A Predictable Time Builds the Habit, Random Alerts Break It
Participants described Daily Dose fitting most naturally into existing moments: a bus ride to work, a morning routine, or a coffee break. A regular cue could make the service easier to incorporate into the day without setting aside a separate block of time. Early availability appealed to some people, though work schedules and breaks were not equally predictable for everyone.
Notifications were mainly described as helpful reminders rather than as a demand to watch immediately, especially when the story remained available until there was time to view it. The pattern is not a broad rejection of alerts: it is a preference for reminders that support an existing routine and can accommodate different schedules.
Supporting participant quotes
Woman, 22: “It makes it very easy to incorporate it in your routine: while I’m sitting on the bus on my way to work, it’s something I can build into my routine every day. You don’t need to set aside time for it.”
Woman, 22: “Notifications are a nice way to remind you to do that thing. I really tried to make it a routine, with a time of day that triggers me to look at the news.”
Man, 20: “If I get this notification in the morning, right when I wake up, then I don’t know what has happened during the night or what I may have missed from the day before.”
Woman, 22: “Maybe you could set for yourself when you want the notification—if you know you will only have time in the evening, you get it in the evening, and others can have it in the morning. But the notification was good; otherwise I could easily forget.”
Woman, 26: “Personally, I usually watch the news during my coffee break. I liked the earlier times.”
Woman, 26: “I had to wait until I had time… I don’t have fixed coffee breaks or lunch times. I take it when I have time. It became a bit ad hoc that way.”