As part of Black Nights 2025, the Industry@Tallinn & Baltic Event section brought together key voices from the film trade press to analyze the visible and invisible mechanisms that determine the circulation of information in an audiovisual ecosystem facing shrinking budgets, the growing influence of AI and an increasingly intense global competition. The panel, titled “Breaking the Noise: How Trade Magazines Shape Film Visibility”, aimed —with a critical eye and a certain degree of professional self-awareness— to unpack how industry coverage is constructed, filtered and amplified in a media landscape where every title must fight to carve out space amid global noise. Moderated by Davide Abbatescianni of Cineuropa, the session gathered Amber Wilkinson (Eye for Film and regular contributor to Screen International), The Hollywood Reporter’s Global Business Editor Georg Szalai, critic and journalist Carmen Gray (The Film Verdict), Baltic Film Magazine editor Eda Koppel, and publicist Christian De Schutter, who opened the discussion by recalling the diverse paths that typically lead journalists into the profession. “If you gather 20 journalists and ask them how they got into the industry, you’ll probably get 20 different stories,” Wilkinson summed up, noting that while some come from political or business reporting and others from national promotional agencies or festival criticism, all agree that today’s trade journalism operates with fewer resources, tighter deadlines and an ever-expanding set of responsibilities.

The first major dilemma —raised by Abbatescianni as the “elephant in the room”— was whether trade publications still hold the same power to shape a film’s trajectory as they once did. De Schutter argued that they remain “essential for the industry,” although the shift toward freelancing and the push for exclusives have altered coverage patterns: with shrinking budgets, “freelancers are no longer allowed to write that much about the films they see at festivals,” he explained. For Szalai, one of the most striking changes is the pressure to frame film journalism within trending global narratives: “In London, everything is filtered through a prism that The Hollywood Reporter understands and that maybe even consumers understand,” he stated, listing the topics currently driving editorial focus —“AI… Trump… Ukraine… Gaza”— even when writers try to anchor their pieces in cinema itself. European trade outlets, several panelists agreed, tend to resist this spiral more often, though the pull of catchy headlines and star power continues to weigh heavily. Wilkinson nevertheless defended the importance of discovery: “From a trade perspective, you’re looking for films that are ultimately going to reach an audience wider than that one festival… I feel there’s more freedom because I don’t need to chase the topic of the day in quite the same way.” Meanwhile, Koppel pointed out the structural challenge for smaller industries: “It’s very difficult to get coverage, especially because our films rarely have world premieres in the big festivals… Getting coverage from trade magazines for small countries is complicated,” she said, adding that her publication therefore prioritizes depth over speed —a need Wilkinson reinforced by stressing the value of regional festivals like Tallinn to ensure local cinema is written about: “Every region has fabulous cinema and we should be writing about it.”

Shifting to the realities of festival labor, the panel exposed the invisible machinery behind every review or news report. Szalai described the frantic multitasking that defines major events —newsletters, interviews, late-night screenings, impossible schedules— and expressed the feeling through a sports metaphor: “It’s like you’re racing Usain Bolt in a sprint and starting ten meters behind… You’re always behind, but I try not to be too behind.” Gray, for her part, highlighted the extreme precarity defining freelance life, intensified during festivals by the relentless pace: “Time pressure is a big thing. You’ve got to organise your time to get everything in.” Publicists also face their own obstacles: De Schutter emphasized the need for preparedness and swift responsiveness in delivering press materials, while Wilkinson mentioned a recurring issue: “not knowing the sales agent before filing a review,” which complicates communication and workflow. Among the recurring topics, advance screeners held a central place. Gray was clear: “I think screeners aren’t a question of laziness… I genuinely think they lead to better reviews,” and explained that festivals can saturate a critic’s capacity to the point where even if they discover an extraordinary film, they might no longer have the bandwidth to cover it. Wilkinson echoed this view and dismantled assumptions about critics’ ability to imagine the theatrical experience: “Sometimes people treat us as if we can’t ‘scale up’ from a laptop or a TV to a cinema screen. It’s our job to do that, to be open to that idea.” Meanwhile, Koppel and Gray pointed to another persistent issue: the uneven availability and quality of stills, with some films providing “too many stills” and others none that accurately reflect their tone.

The session concluded with a critical look at the role of influencers and the instant forms of engagement that dominate social platforms. While Abbatescianni acknowledged their reach, he questioned their contribution: “A lot of what they do is reading the Wikipedia synopsis, while pictures appear on top pointing at us, plus spoilers, lots of spoilers. What added value does that bring?” Wilkinson countered from a promotional point of view: “no publicity is bad publicity,” though she sees greater potential in structured, topic-driven podcasts. Gray, however, voiced a broader concern: “I’m worried about the erosion of the written word. This instant culture is getting further and further away from in-depth pieces.” Across the testimonies, the panel revealed a delicate ecosystem —the one connecting filmmakers, publicists, trade outlets and festivals— operating with diminishing resources but still central to the circulation of international cinema. Szalai summed it up with a close-to-home anecdote: after writing about the Estonian film Mo Papa, a professor of the filmmaker approached him to express gratitude and shared that he had proudly posted the review online. “I thought, ‘that was my win at the festival.’ Even if nobody clicked, it’s a win: getting someone excited about something good.”