Introduction
Interest in psilocybin as a potential treatment for depression has intensified over the past decade, driven by a growing body of high-quality clinical trials demonstrating its therapeutic potential (Carhart-Harris et al. Reference Carhart-Harris, Giribaldi, Watts, Baker-Jones, Murphy-Beiner, Murphy, Martell, Blemings, Erritzoe and Nutt2021; Goodwin et al. Reference Goodwin, Aaronson, Alvarez, Arden, Baker and Bennett2022; Reference Goodwin, Aaronson, Alvarez, Carhart-Harris, Chai-Rees and Croal2025; Gukasyan et al. Reference Gukasyan, Davis, Barrett, Cosimano, Sepeda, Johnson and Griffiths2022; Raison et al. Reference Raison, Sanacora, Woolley, Heinzerling, Dunlop and Brown2023; von Rotz et al. Reference von Rotz, Schindowski, Jungwirth, Schuldt, Rieser, Zahoranszky, Seifritz, Nowak, Nowak, Jäncke, Preller and Vollenweider2023). These studies have shown promising results including significant reductions in depressive symptoms and sustained improvements over time. These findings have not only captured the attention of clinicians and regulators but have also been widely disseminated through mainstream media, leading to a surge in public interest and optimism about psilocybin’s role in mental health care.
The media plays a pivotal role in shaping public perceptions of medical treatments as the general public often relies on online news sources for information about clinical research. This influence could be particularly significant in the context of psilocybin, where we hypothesise media coverage has highlighted its potential benefits while sometimes overlooking the complexities and limitations of the research. For example, current research on psilocybin for the treatment of depression has encountered methodological challenges in blinding, expectancy effects, and placebo-control (Simonsson et al. Reference Simonsson, Carlbring, Carhart-Harris, Davis, Nutt, Griffiths, Erritzoe and Goldberg2023) and has received criticism for study design limitations including short-term follow-up only or small sample sizes (Metaxa & Clarke Reference Metaxa and Clarke2024). Negative public perceptions and attitudes may slow scientific progress and treatment accessibility (Yaden et al. Reference Yaden, Potash and Griffiths2022), and news media reporting is associated with an increase in the use of psychedelics (Livne et al. Reference Livne, Shmulewitz, Walsh and Hasin2022), and misuse of psychoactive substances more generally (Dasgupta et al. Reference Dasgupta, Mandl and Brownstein2009). However, the media’s portrayal of psilocybin can also contribute to unrealistic expectations. Yaden et al. (Reference Yaden, Potash and Griffiths2022) highlight a shift in psychedelic media coverage from alarmist negativity (1960s–2000s) to recognising their therapeutic potential (2006–present). Recent headlines often exaggerate psychedelics as “miracle drugs” or lucrative investments, prompting scholars and clinicians to caution against the risks of creating a “hype” or “bubble” around early positive findings (Yaden et al. Reference Yaden, Potash and Griffiths2022). Nevertheless, the optimism for psilocybin as a potential treatment for depression is maintained by several notable figures in the field (Nutt et al. Reference Nutt, Crome and Young2024a), and psychiatrists in general remain optimistic (Berger & Fitzgerald Reference Berger and Fitzgerald2023; Gribben et al. Reference Gribben, Burke, Harrington, Husein, Murnane, Hendricks, Tobin, Ivers, Thuery, Harkin and Kelly2024; Grover et al. Reference Grover, Monds and Montebello2023; Page et al. Reference Page, Rehman, Syed, Forcer and Campbell2021). This tension between enthusiasm and caution underscores the need for balanced and accurate media reporting.
The regulatory landscape for psychedelic treatments is also evolving. While 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA)-assisted therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was recently declined approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (Reardon, Reference Reardon2024), both MDMA and psilocybin have been approved in Australia since 2023 for the treatment of PTSD and treatment-resistant depression, respectively (Kisely, Reference Kisely2023; Nutt et al. Reference Nutt, Hunt, Schlag and Fitzgerald2024b). These developments have attracted media interest in the recognition of psychedelics as beneficial medical treatments, but also raise questions about how media coverage could potentially influence public attitudes and policy decisions.
Previous studies have examined media coverage of emerging treatments, highlighting the role of news reporting in shaping public discourse and policy. For instance, Gallagher et al. (Reference Gallagher, Neiman, Slattery and McLoughlin2021) analysed online news media coverage of ketamine as a treatment for depression from 2000 to 2017, while Zhang et al. (Reference Zhang, Hong, Husain, Harris, Ho and Hashimoto2017) explored how ketamine treatment was framed in US and Canadian print media from 2000 to 2015. Similarly, Lynch et al., (Reference Lynch2021) investigated 295 US newspaper articles from 2015 on cannabis legalisation, providing insights into how legalisation efforts were reported in the media. Beyond ketamine and cannabis, broader analyses of news media have explored reporting on substances such as e-cigarettes, opioids, alcohol, and prescription drugs (Almomani et al. Reference Almomani, Patel and Donyai2023; Kersbergen et al. Reference Kersbergen, Buykx, Brennan, Brown, Michie and Holmes2022; McGinty et al. Reference McGinty, Kennedy-Hendricks, Baller, Niederdeppe, Gollust and Barry2015; Lyu et al. Reference Lyu, Wang, Huang and Ling2021; Webster et al. Reference Webster, Rice and Sud2020).
Studies examining psilocybin coverage, however, are scarce and limited to the USA. Notably, Oliver, (Reference Oliver2021) examined the sentiment and frequency of psilocybin coverage in four regional US newspapers between 1989 and 2020, finding that rising positive sentiment was only captured in one newspaper. A recent thematic analysis examining 212 American news articles from 2017 to 2023 found that while “Pop Culture and Recreation” was the most reported theme, followed by Law, all identified themes increased in frequency in 2022 and 2023 (Giorgio, Reference Giorgio2024).
These studies collectively underscore the media’s power to influence public perceptions of medical and policy issues while also revealing gaps in understanding how emerging treatments, like psilocybin, are portrayed on a global anglophone scale. To date, no study has systematically examined the comprehensiveness of global anglophone online news media reporting and sentiment on psilocybin as a treatment for depression from 2000 to 2024. This gap in the literature is significant, given the increasing prominence of psilocybin in both scientific research and public discourse. Such insights are critical for informing future research, clinical practice, and policy decisions, ensuring that the potential of psilocybin is realised in a responsible and evidence-based manner.
Methods
Our aim was to examine the comprehensiveness and sentiment of online news media coverage of psilocybin as a treatment for depression from 1 January 2000 to 31 May 2024. The methodology was inspired by and based on a similar study describing the online news reporting of ketamine for depression (Gallagher et al. Reference Gallagher, Neiman, Slattery and McLoughlin2021), and a study describing the sentiment of psilocybin over time in four American newspapers (Oliver, Reference Oliver2021). The year 2000 onwards was selected to capture the modern, internet-based news era and to permit comparison with previous work (e.g. Gallagher et al., which began in 2000). The end date (31 May 2024) was chosen to include developments up to the most recent major clinical and regulatory events that predate our data extraction and to provide a broad, multi-decade perspective on coverage trends and the more recent resurgence of clinical interest after 2016. Articles were sourced from the 30 most popular English-language online news resources based on Amazon.com’s Alexa web ranking service. The main inclusion criterion was that all articles must discuss psilocybin as treatment for depression in humans. In practice, inclusion required that the article contain substantive discussion of psilocybin as a treatment for depression (trial results, clinical context, risks/benefits, or patient perspectives). Articles that only mentioned psilocybin in passing (≤1 paragraph) were excluded.
We also excluded editorials, op-eds, letters to the editor, columns, and market/financial pieces where the primary focus was investment/policy analysis without substantive discussion of psilocybin as a treatment for depression (i.e. financial-market or policy commentary that did not discuss clinical or patient-focused aspects).
Each website was searched using the keywords “psilocybin,” “magic mushroom*,” “hallucinogenic mushroom*,” and “psychedelic mushroom” both for singular and plural forms. Slang terms such as “shrooms” were omitted. Also not included were hallucinogenic compounds other than psilocybin, for example, muscimol (Amanita species) (Oliver, Reference Oliver2021). If the native search algorithm for a specific website was insufficient, a Google Advanced Search was performed instead. Articles mentioning other classical 5-HT2A agonists (e.g. lysergic acid diethylamide: LSD; N,N-Dimethyltryptamine: DMT) were not captured unless they explicitly referenced psilocybin; this exclusion was deliberate to maintain focus on psilocybin and ensure comparability with prior single-compound media studies.
All identified articles were reviewed by GB, and only those that discussed psilocybin as treatment for depression in humans were included for analysis. Additionally, the word count, date of publication, newspaper outlet, and country were also recorded.
Articles meeting inclusion criteria were de-identified by GB (date, news source, reporter details omitted) and entered into a simple text file. Two independent blinded raters (CH, AG, TB, GT) separately assessed each de-identified article in line with the 13-item instrument adapted from Gallagher et al. (Reference Gallagher, Neiman, Slattery and McLoughlin2021) and the sentimental analysis tool adapted from Oliver (Reference Oliver2021). The independent raters met to resolve all discrepancies and decide on further articles for exclusion.
As the authors reside and work in Ireland, a subset analysis was performed on Irish online news media outlets. Using the same methodology, we identified 16 articles from the top three Irish news media outlets: The Irish Times, The Irish Independent, and The Irish Examiner. GB, CH, AG, and TB are from similar educational/professional backgrounds working as trainee psychiatrists. GT is a postdoctoral researcher in neuroscience.
Measures
A) Item instrument
Thirteen binary questions were adapted from Gallagher et al. (Reference Gallagher, Neiman, Slattery and McLoughlin2021) with the aim of capturing the comprehensiveness of specific details in the articles regarding psilocybin and its role in the treatment of depression, such as indications for use, onset, duration and mechanism of action, comparison with conventional antidepressants, side effects and potential for misuse, regulatory matters, and the depth of reporting by inclusion of expert and patient opinion and experience.
These questions were chosen to reflect important aspects of clinical practice in order to inform interested readers. Raters noted the presence or absence of the following in each article (a score of 1 if answered “yes” and 0 if answered “no”).
-
1. Did the article discuss psilocybin for treating clinical depression?
-
2. Did the article describe the onset of psilocybin’s antidepressant effects?
-
3. Did the article describe the duration of psilocybin’s antidepressant effects?
-
4. Did the article discuss psilocybin’s potential biological mechanism of action?
-
5. Did the article discuss psilocybin’s potential psychological mechanism of action?
-
6. Did the article discuss the lack of long-term evidence for psilocybin?
-
7. Did the article describe subjective effects of psilocybin such as religious/spiritual experiences, oceanic boundlessness, or social connectedness
-
8. Did the article mention psilocybin’s potential physical side effects?
-
9. Did the article discuss any addictive effects of psilocybin?
-
10. Was there a discussion of the presence/absence of any formal guidance on psilocybin, for example, FDA, European Medicines Agency approval?
-
11. Did the article discuss the risks of unregulated or unsupervised use of psilocybin?
-
12. Was a researcher consulted or quoted?
-
13. Was a patient quoted?
Each article was given a score out of 13, which reflected the detail within the article. Larger scores indicate a more comprehensive coverage of psilocybin in the treatment of depression.
B) Sentiment
Sentiment was assessed following previous work in this area (McGinty et al. Reference McGinty, Kennedy-Hendricks, Baller, Niederdeppe, Gollust and Barry2015; Oliver Reference Oliver2021; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Hong, Husain, Harris, Ho and Hashimoto2017). As articles mention both positive and negative opinions on psilocybin, five thematic categories were used to rate sentiment about psilocybin. For a given category, each article will be given a score of −1 (negative), 0 (neutral), or + 1 (positive). The total scores in each thematic category were then calculated for each year. The scores in each category were also added together to provide a single sentiment score for each year.
The five thematic categories in the present study were:
-
1. Legality: Is psilocybin seen merely as an illicit substance (negative) or as a substance that should be legal as a medical treatment (positive)?
-
2. Mode of Action: Is psilocybin seen as physically damaging (negative) or physically beneficial (positive) to the user?
-
3. Personal Impact: Is psilocybin seen as psychologically detrimental (negative) or psychologically beneficial (positive) to the user?
-
4. Scientific Integrity: Is psilocybin research seen as pseudoscience (negative) or rigorous and serious (positive)?
-
5. Social Impact: Is psilocybin seen as detrimental (negative) or beneficial (positive) to society beyond the user?
Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 26.0 (IBM Corporation, NY, USA). Articles were grouped into four distinct time frames: “Pre-2015, “2016–2018,” “2019–2021,” and “2022–2024.” A chi-squared or Fisher’s exact test was used to assess for differences between the four time periods. An analysis of variance was used to assess differences between mean scores of each of the four time frames. A p value <0.05 was deemed statistically significant. The mean sentiment scores were also calculated for each year.
Results
A total of 3,901 articles, from the top 30 English-language online news websites (see Table 1), were identified using the search method between 1 January 2000 to 31 May 2024. Of the 3,901 articles, 2,523 were excluded for irrelevance, meaning the article did not mention psilocybin for the treatment of depression (see Figure 1). This was conducted by an initial screening of search results (title and summary/snippet) to remove items that clearly did not refer to psilocybin as a treatment for depression (e.g. entertainment pieces, unrelated “psilocybin” use, or articles referring to other compounds). This first stage accounted for the 2,523 exclusions reported. Of the remaining 568 articles, 413 were further excluded at stage 2 by GB, and 30 more were excluded at stage 3 by independent raters. The second stage required full-text review of the remaining articles to apply the pre-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria (including the ≥1 paragraph threshold and exclusion of editorials/op-eds/financial-only pieces, etc). This stage generated the 413 exclusions. Following de-identification and rater calibration, independent raters excluded a further 30 articles at stage three for failing inclusion criteria on closer review (e.g. misclassified references, duplicate reports, or articles that discussed animal studies but not human treatment). The content of the remaining 125 articles was analysed. One additional article was chosen by GB for initial rater calibration. All raters assessed this article and then met to discuss any variance and resolve discrepancies. 2022–2024 saw the largest number of articles (n = 54, 43.2%), followed by 2019–2021 (n = 31, 24.8%), 2016–2018 (n = 26, 30.8%), and finally, the pre-2015 period had the fewest number of articles published (n = 14, 11.2%) (see Figure 2). The 30 websites were broken down into regions as follows: the USA (n = 86), the UK (n = 24), India (n = 10), Germany (n = 4), Australia (n = 2), and Canada (n = 1). The vast majority (86/127 = 68%) of relevant news articles published online between 2000 and 2024 were from the USA. The UK and India, respectively, had 24 (18.8%) and 10 (7.8%) articles each. Germany had four articles (3.1%), Australia had two articles (1.6%), and Canada had only one article (0.8%). The New York Times had the largest number of articles at 16 (9.8%), followed closely by The Guardian with 15 articles (9.2%). Forbes, BBC, and NBC News were also common, each appearing 10 times (6.1%). A total of 1,612 pairs of observations were made for the 13 binary rating items, and the inter-rater agreement was excellent (0.82). There were 84 discrepancies, and the six rater pairs (with each pair consisting of two individuals selected from a group of four people – CH, AG, TB, and GT) met individually to resolve all discrepancies and arrived at a mutual agreement regarding the binary rating for each question on the 13-item instrument. All articles discussed psilocybin for treating clinical depression, which was the inclusion criterion, and thus, this item was removed from analysis (see Figure 3). The authors of almost every article quoted or consulted with a researcher (90.4%). Over half commented on the onset (54.4%), duration (59.2%), biological and psychological mechanisms of actions (54.4% and 63.2%, respectively), and the presence/absence of any formal guidance on psilocybin (58.4%). Just under half commented on the lack of long-term evidence for psilocybin (46.4%), its subjective effects (48.8%), and risks of unregulated/unsupervised use (47.2%). Only a quarter of the articles quoted a patient, and only 8% discussed any addictive potential of psilocybin. The latter is likely due to psilocybin’s negligible addictive effects, in addition to it being investigated for its potential as a treatment for addiction disorders (Bogenschutz et al. Reference Bogenschutz, Ross, Bhatt, Baron, Forcehimes, Laska, Mennenga, ODonnell, Owens, Podrebarac, Rotrosen, Tonigan and Worth2022; Johnson et al. Reference Johnson, Garcia-Romeu, Cosimano and Griffiths2014; Reiser et al. Reference Rieser, Bitar, Halm, Rossgoderer, Gubser, Thévenaz, Kreis, Von Rotz, Nordt, Visentini, Moujaes, Engeli, Ort, Seifritz, Vollenweider, Herdener and Preller2025; van der Meer et al. Reference van der Meer, Fuentes, Kaptein, Schoones, de Waal, Goudriaan, Kramers, Schellekens, Somers, Bossong and Batalla2023). Chi-squared or Fisher’s exact test was used to assess for differences between the time periods for each of the 13 questions. Only Q2) “Did the article describe the onset of psilocybin’s antidepressant effects?” and Q3) “Did the article describe the duration of psilocybin’s antidepressant effects?” were found to be statistically significantly different between the time periods, showing an increase in the frequency of reporting over time. Total mean scoring across all time periods was 6.85 (SD 2.27, 95% CI, 6.45–7.25). There were no statistically significant differences between mean detail scores by time period.
Figure 1. A flow chart demonstrating the process of identifying, screening, and excluding articles.
Figure 2. Articles by year of publication. Note: 2024 is excluded.
Figure 3. Thirteen-item instrument analysis by each 4-year period. The y-axis displays the proportion (%) of “yes” answers to the 13 content items within each 4-year period.
Table 1. The top 30 English-language online news media outlets and the number of articles included in the analysis
Total sentiment ranged from −2 to 4 out of a minimum of −5 negative sentiment and maximum of 5 positive sentiment. The mean sentiment across all articles was 2.27 (SD 1.33, 95% CI, 2.04–2.51). Despite an overall upward trend in positive sentiment, there was no statistically significant difference between mean sentiment across time periods.
Irish reporting of psilocybin for the treatment of depression
A total of 137 articles were identified using the search method between 1 January 2000 to 31 May 2024. 93 were excluded for irrelevance, meaning the article did not mention psilocybin for the treatment of depression. Of the remaining 44 articles, 23 were further excluded at stage 2 by GB, and 5 more were excluded at stage 3 by independent raters. The content of the remaining 16 articles was analysed.
Half of all analysed articles were published between 2022–2024 (n = 8, 50%), with the remainder split between the other time periods. The Irish Times and The Irish Examiner both had six articles published each (37.5%), and The Irish Independent published four articles (25%).
Almost every article’s author quoted or consulted with a researcher (93.8%) and discussed formal guidance on psilocybin (e.g. FDA or EU approval) (87.5%). Most articles described psilocybin’s potential mechanism of action (68.8%), onset (62.5%), subjective effects (62.5%), and its duration of effects (56.3%). Half of the articles discussed the potential biological mechanism of action and risks associated with unregulated or unsupervised use. Comparatively, the lack of long-term evidence (37.5%), any addictive effects (25.0%), and potential physical side effects (18.8%) were less discussed. Only two articles directly quoted a patient (12.5%).
The total mean across all time periods was 7.25 (6.31–8.19 95% CI, SD 1.77). There were no statistically significant differences between mean detail scores by time period.
Total sentiment ranged from 0 to 4 out of a minimum of −5 and maximum of 5. The mean sentiment across all articles was 2.31 (SD 1.2 95% CI 1.68–2.95). There was no statistically significant difference between mean sentiment across time periods.
Comparison between the two groups was limited by the small Irish sample size and thus revealed no statistically significant differences.
Discussion
Summary of main findings
This study examined the comprehensiveness and sentiment in reporting of psilocybin as a treatment for depression in English-language online news articles published between January 2000 to May 2024. From a total of 3,901 articles identified, 125 relevant articles on psilocybin for treating depression were analysed after exclusions. 43.2% were published between 2022 and 2024, predominantly from the USA (68%). Most articles (90.4%) cited researchers, and over half discussed psilocybin’s onset (54.4%), duration (59.2%), biological mechanisms (54.4%), and psychological mechanisms (63.2%). Nearly half (46.4%) mentioned the lack of long-term evidence, and discussed risks related to unsupervised use (47.2%), while only 8% addressed addictive potential. Statistical analysis showed that reporting on psilocybin’s onset and duration increased over time, but no significant differences were found in the overall detail scores across time periods. Mean sentiment across articles was 2.27 on a scale from −5 (most negative) to + 5 (most positive) (SD 1.33), reflecting a very positive tone, with no significant differences in sentiment across time periods.
Trends and context
The results suggest that the increasing media coverage of psilocybin for depression is driven by an increase in the number of clinical studies, which in turn suggests a growing acceptance of psychedelic research, particularly as positive findings from clinical trials have emerged (Carhart-Harris et al. Reference Carhart-Harris, Giribaldi, Watts, Baker-Jones, Murphy-Beiner, Murphy, Martell, Blemings, Erritzoe and Nutt2021; Goodwin et al. Reference Goodwin, Aaronson, Alvarez, Arden, Baker and Bennett2022; Reference Goodwin, Aaronson, Alvarez, Carhart-Harris, Chai-Rees and Croal2025; Gukasyan et al. Reference Gukasyan, Davis, Barrett, Cosimano, Sepeda, Johnson and Griffiths2022; Raison et al. Reference Raison, Sanacora, Woolley, Heinzerling, Dunlop and Brown2023; von Rotz et al. Reference von Rotz, Schindowski, Jungwirth, Schuldt, Rieser, Zahoranszky, Seifritz, Nowak, Nowak, Jäncke, Preller and Vollenweider2023). This temporal increase in coverage coincides with an increase in the number and visibility of clinical studies and regulatory activity. While our design does not permit causal attribution, it is plausible that the growing clinical evidence base (and associated media reporting of these studies) contributed to increased media attention. This increase is especially noticeable from 2016 onwards, peaking in 2022–2024, coinciding with notable studies (e.g. Phase 2b trial for psilocybin and depression (Goodwin et al. Reference Goodwin, Aaronson, Alvarez, Arden, Baker and Bennett2022) and legal changes (Kisely, Reference Kisely2023; Nutt Reference Nutt, Hunt, Schlag and Fitzgerald2024b; Reardon Reference Reardon2024). This shift is partly driven by growing evidence suggesting that psilocybin and other psychedelics have therapeutic potential, especially for treatment-resistant depression (Goodwin et al. Reference Goodwin, Aaronson, Alvarez, Arden, Baker and Bennett2022). As positive results from studies emerged, media coverage likely increased in response to the public’s curiosity and interest in alternative treatments for depression.
The majority of articles originated from the USA, where research and policy changes have been more prominent (Siegel et al. Reference Siegel, Daily, Perry and Nicol2023; Reardon, Reference Reardon2024). As mentioned previously, the media plays a pivotal role in shaping public perceptions of medical treatments. In recent years, there have been influential endorsements from public figures, researchers, and organisations that have increased the visibility of psychedelic therapy. In addition, legal changes such as decriminalisation and legalisation initiatives in some US states (e.g. Oregon’s Measure 109) have prompted media outlets to cover the topic more extensively. These developments have helped to bring discussions about psilocybin into mainstream media, encouraging more frequent and positive media coverage. The USA accounted for the majority (68%) of the relevant articles, which may be attributed to the country’s role as a leader in psychedelic research and policy reform. The USA is home to several prominent institutions conducting research on psychedelics (e.g. Johns Hopkins University, MAPS), which garners media attention. Additionally, state-level policy changes towards the decriminalisation or medical use of psychedelics have created a favourable environment for news coverage. However, because we deliberately sampled high-reach English-language online outlets, the geographic concentration of articles is likely driven at least in part by this sampling bias rather than solely by clinical or research activity.
Coverage was concentrated in prominent outlets such as the New York Times, The Guardian, and Forbes suggesting that the topic of psilocybin for depression received the most attention from a handful of prominent outlets, predominantly based in the USA and the UK. As research progressed, articles increasingly focused on specific aspects like the onset and duration of psilocybin’s effects, suggesting that media narratives evolved with accumulating evidence.
The statistically significant increase in the frequency of reporting on the onset and duration of psilocybin’s antidepressant effects over time suggests that as more clinical data became available, journalists became better informed to report on these specific details. Early coverage may have been more general due to the novelty of the research, while later articles could provide more detailed information as the body of evidence grew.
While nearly all the articles’ authors consulted researchers, fewer discussed potential risks, long-term evidence, or patient perspectives. Indeed, coverage of patient perspectives was minimal, with only 25% of articles quoting a patient. This focus on expert opinions rather than firsthand experiences may indicate a preference for objectivity over subjective experience in health reporting, whereas reports of subjective experience are more likely to be included in opinion pieces. The limited discussion on addictive potential aligns with psilocybin’s low risk of addictive potential.
Comparisons with similar studies
Although comparisons to the study by Gallagher et al. (Reference Gallagher, Neiman, Slattery and McLoughlin2021) are limited in nature as they examined ketamine, both studies assessed the reporting of novel treatments for depression, which have previously been labelled as “drugs of abuse,” using a similar methodology. Nonetheless, we found a larger number of articles discussing psilocybin for depression versus ketamine (125 v. 97), and our study had a wider time frame (24 years v. 17 years). Both studies found that most authors consulted or quoted a researcher, while simultaneously, very few articles had direct quotes from patients. Reporting on lack of evidence and abuse potential was similar, as were mechanisms and duration of actions. Both studies found no statistically significant difference in the overall level of detail within articles during the time periods.
The generally positive sentiment in articles, with a gradual shift towards a more favourable tone, likely reflects promising research outcomes and a reduction in the stigma surrounding psychedelics. Although there was no statistically significant difference between mean sentiment across time periods, there was a gradual trend towards increasingly positive sentiment over the years (see S.I. Figure S1 and Figure S2).
As stigma around psychedelics diminishes, journalists may be more inclined to present psilocybin in a positive light, emphasising its therapeutic potential rather than its associated risks or controversies. Oliver (Reference Oliver2021) reported on sentiment becoming increasingly more positive in only one of the four American newspapers examined, which contrasts with our findings of generally increasingly positive global sentiment over time. The only newspaper that had positive sentiment for their study was the New York Times, which also featured in our study as the outlet with the largest number of articles (n = 16, 9.8%). Also, while Oliver (Reference Oliver2021) examined sentiment from 1989 to 2020, there were several notable developments since 2020 including more rigorous and high-quality clinical trials and policy changes. Finally, Oliver (Reference Oliver2021) had a wider focus examining sentiment of psilocybin more generally, but only included four American newspapers, whereas our study had a narrower focus on psilocybin as a treatment of depression but completed an analysis of 30 media news outlets.
The study by Giorgio (Reference Giorgio2024) analysing psychedelic coverage in five US newspapers was qualitative in nature and identified themes and frames on reporting trends from 2017 to 2023. In contrast, our study examined comprehensiveness and sentiment using quantitative measures and included articles from 2000 to 2024 from 30 online global anglophone news media outlets. Our study included strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, whereas Giorgio (Reference Giorgio2024) reported on themes including “Pop Culture and Recreation” and “Law.” The qualitative study did include research and clinical trials on psychedelic substances as a subtheme to the science and technology theme, but further comparisons are not possible due to vastly differing methodologies used. Similarly, Giorgio (Reference Giorgio2024) also reported on an increase in articles published between 2022–2023.
Our analysis of the Irish media produced similar findings to the global portrayal of psilocybin for the treatment of depression by online anglophone news media outlets. Although we only examined three news media outlets (the most popular in Ireland), we found similar results for mean comprehensiveness of reporting (7.25 v. 6.85) and mean sentiment (2.31 v. 2.27). Sentiment also appeared to become more positive over time, although there was no statistically significant difference across the time periods. This finding was consistent with a study examining the portrayal of mental health in the mainstream Irish news media, which found that over the last 19 years, there continued to be an increasingly positive tone and improved comprehensiveness (Gallagher et al. Reference Gallagher, OLeary, McGreal-Ballone and Duffy2023).
Implications for clinicians and patients
Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals will play a critical role in the future of psychedelic therapy. Research suggests that their knowledge and attitudes towards psychedelics may significantly influence the integration of these treatments into clinical practice (Gribben et al. Reference Gribben, Burke, Harrington, Husein, Murnane, Hendricks, Tobin, Ivers, Thuery, Harkin and Kelly2024). As such, media coverage not only shapes public opinion but is also impacted by the perspectives of healthcare providers, who play a key role in determining the accessibility and appropriateness of psilocybin therapy. There does appear to be a demand for further research from mental health service users and patients. Surveys indicate that a substantial proportion of mental health service users support further research into psilocybin (72%) and endorse its use as a medical intervention (59%) (Corrigan et al. Reference Corrigan, Haran, McCandliss, McManus, Cleary, Trant, Kelly, Ledden, Rush, OKeane and Kelly2022).
Strengths and limitations
This study advances our understanding of the comprehensiveness and sentiment of global anglophone online news media reporting on psilocybin as a treatment for depression from 2000 to 2024. To strengthen our methodology, we adapted two instruments that had been used previously in the literature to assess comprehensiveness (Gallagher et al. Reference Gallagher, Neiman, Slattery and McLoughlin2021) and sentiment (Oliver, Reference Oliver2021). The inter-rater agreement was excellent for the binary rating items used to evaluate the articles, with a Cohen’s kappa score of 0.82 over 1,612 pairs of observations, indicating high consistency among reviewers. We then resolved discrepancies through individual discussions among rater pairs, and an initial rater calibration was performed prior to analysis. We also included articles from a larger time frame than similar studies (Gallagher et al. Reference Gallagher, Neiman, Slattery and McLoughlin2021; Giorgio Reference Giorgio2024; Lynch et al. Reference Lyu, Wang, Huang and Ling2021) and examined global news media outlets where previous studies remained localised to the USA (Oliver, Reference Oliver2021; Giorgio, Reference Giorgio2024). We also included the perspective of Irish media reporting, which offers novel insights. The study focused exclusively on the top 30 English-language online news outlets, potentially overlooking global discourse on psilocybin as a treatment for depression. By excluding non-English sources and smaller or regional outlets, we may have missed cultural, linguistic, and regional differences in the portrayal of psilocybin for the treatment of depression. A reliance on Amazon’s Alexa rankings may also introduce bias, as these may not fully reflect all the diverse media use by the public. While the study included a previously used sentiment analysis tool, the subjective nature of scoring introduces potential rater bias. Despite high inter-rater agreement, thematic categories like “Legality” and “Scientific Integrity” may not fully capture nuanced media framing. For instance, articles presenting both positive and negative aspects might receive neutral scores, failing to reflect narrative complexity. Additionally, it was difficult to account for tone or context, which could influence reader perceptions beyond binary sentiment scores. To our knowledge, there have been no studies using large language models (LLM) or machine learning to examine news coverage of psychedelics. However, Chandra et al. (Reference Chandra, Zhu, Fang and Shinjikashvili2025) utilised a LLM for sentiment analysis of “The Guardian” during COVID-19 and there have been other similar use cases for news trends in general (Al-Garadi et al. Reference Al-Garadi, Yang and Sarker2022; Sheshadri et al. Reference Sheshadri, Ajmeri and Staddon2017; Tunca et al., Reference Tunca, Sezen and Wilk2023) Although using a large language model (LLM) might reduce bias, we opted for human raters given the complex and nuanced nature of psychedelic therapy and the inherent subjectivity involved in sentiment analysis.
Other studies have highlighted the use of other forms of media as sources of data. Sakai and colleagues (Reference Sakai, Bradley, Zamaria, Agin-Liebes, Kelley, Fish, Martini, Ferris, Morton, Michalak, O’Donovan and Woolley2024) analysed the content of 443 Reddit posts for describing psilocybin and SSRI coadministration. Lea and colleagues (Lea et al. Reference Lea, Amada and Jungaberle2020) similarly analysed psychedelic microdosing using Reddit. Our study excluded other forms of media, such as videos, podcasts, and social media platforms (e.g. Twitter, YouTube), which can play a significant role in shaping public opinion, especially among younger audiences (Yaden et al. Reference Yaden, Potash and Griffiths2022). Although this omission limits our study’s ability to fully represent public discourse on psilocybin, it enhances the credibility of our findings as we focused solely on long-established news media outlets with professional journalists.
Our study focused solely on psilocybin, but the same methodological approach used in our study could readily be applied to other 5-HT2A psychedelics (e.g. LSD, DMT, mescaline, or MDMA where relevant), offering an important direction for future comparative media analyses given differences in regulatory attention and public narratives across compounds.
While the high level of inter-rater agreement indicates consistency, rater background can still influence subjective judgements, particularly in assessing sentiment or scientific integrity. Future studies may benefit from including raters with more diverse training (e.g. lay public, clinicians, science journalists) or by combining human coding with natural language processing methods to further test the robustness of findings.
Finally, the study spanned 2000 to 2024, a period during which media coverage of psilocybin evolved significantly. Early coverage (pre-2015) often framed psilocybin as an illicit drug, while later coverage (post-2016) increasingly emphasised its therapeutic potential. This temporal bias may have influenced the results, as reporting quality, depth, and sentiment likely improved with more robust clinical evidence. The field continues to rapidly expand, and there have been several notable developments since our cutoff of May 2024 that could influence media coverage and sentiment. In the USA, the FDA declined approval of MDMA-assisted therapy for PTSD in August 2024, citing limitations in trial design and insufficient evidence of safety and efficacy (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2024). By contrast, momentum around psilocybin has continued, with COMPASS Pathways announcing positive topline Phase III results in treatment-resistant depression (COMPASS Pathways, 2025). In Europe, Germany launched the first EU-based compassionate-use programme for psilocybin in treatment-resistant depression in July 2025 (Central Institute of Mental Health, 2025), while the UK Royal College of Psychiatrists called for restricted compassionate access under clinical supervision (Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2025). Clinically, a recent qualitative study highlighted that patients report both substantial benefits and meaningful challenges in psilocybin treatment for major depressive disorder and treatment-resistant depression (Breeksema et al. Reference Breeksema, Niemeijer, Krediet, Karsten, Kamphuis, Vermetten, van den Brink and Schoevers2024), and Rieser et al. (Reference Rieser, Bitar, Halm, Rossgoderer, Gubser, Thévenaz, Kreis, Von Rotz, Nordt, Visentini, Moujaes, Engeli, Ort, Seifritz, Vollenweider, Herdener and Preller2025) demonstrated promising results for psilocybin-assisted therapy in relapse prevention among individuals with alcohol use disorder in a randomised controlled trial.
Recommendations for media reporting
We recommend that news coverage of psilocybin trials adopt a clearer, more cautious framing that helps readers accurately assess the state of the evidence. Journalists should explicitly report key trial features – sample size, randomisation/blinding, follow-up duration, and the clinical population studied (e.g. whether samples were treatment-resistant) – and highlight any important limitations rather than relying on optimistic soundbites (association of health care journalists, 2025; Science media Centre, 2012). Coverage should also state the current uncertainties about long-term effectiveness and safety and distinguish tightly supervised, protocolised therapeutic settings from unsupervised or recreational use (Ramos De Freitas et al. Reference Ramos De Freitas, Gotsis, Gallo, Fitzgibbon, Bailey and Fitzgerald2025). Where possible, articles should include patient or lived-experience perspectives to balance institutional and investigator quotes and should disclose conflicts of interest and funding sources for the research discussed (Sumner et al. Reference Sumner, Schwartz, Woloshin, Bratton and Chambers2021). Finally, reporters are encouraged to seek independent clinical comment to contextualise findings and avoid hype; together, these practices will help reduce exaggeration and support better-informed public and policy debate (association of health care journalists, 2025; Sumner et al. Reference Sumner, Vivian-Griffiths, Boivin, Williams, Venetis, Davies, Ogden, Whelan, Hughes, Dalton, Boy and Chambers2014)
Future directions
Future work could extend beyond established news outlets to podcasts, video, and social media (e.g. X/Twitter, Reddit, YouTube). To ensure credibility, such studies should use stratified sampling with clear inclusion rules, document source provenance, and combine human coding with computational methods for large-scale analysis. Applying credibility filters (for only verified accounts)and conducting sensitivity checks will help maintain quality, while strict attention to ethics and privacy (e.g. anonymisation, adherence to platform policies) would be essential. We highlight these points both to justify our current focus on established outlets and to outline a roadmap for broader media analyses in the future.
Conclusions
Overall, this study demonstrates a growing media interest in psilocybin as a treatment for depression, with increasing detail in reporting and a generally positive tone. However, coverage remains concentrated in a few regions and prominent outlets, and certain important aspects such as patient experiences and long-term safety receive comparatively less attention. These findings highlight the need for more comprehensive and balanced media reporting as research on psilocybin continues to expand.
Supplementary material
The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/ipm.2025.10142.
Funding statement
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests
JRK is the principal investigator (Ireland) on COMPASS, GH, and Transcend Therapeutics-sponsored clinical trials in Dublin, Ireland. JRK has consulted for Clerkenwell Health and has received grant funding from the Health Research Board (ILP-POR-2022-030, DIFA-2023-005, KTA-2024-002). GB, TB, AG, and CH are trainees in psychiatry and members and co-founders of the Irish Doctors for Psychedelic Assisted Therapy. GT is a postdoctoral researcher at the Trinity Institute of Neuroscience and is working on research exploring psychedelics and the immune system. JRK, GB & GT are members of the Psychedelic Research Group in Dublin, Ireland.
Ethical standards
The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committee on human experimentation and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008. The authors assert that the local ethics committee has determined that ethical approval for publication of this study was not required by their local Ethics Committee.
Open access
