Digital Journalism

Gehrke, Marília; Heinrich, Ansgard

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2026.2686381pmid: N/A

Abstract This paper examines the behind the scenes of fact-checking. Based on in-depth interviews with 16 external assessors and advisory board members working for the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) and the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), it discusses how these professionals assist in establishing credibility for fact-checking organizations. While scholarship till date has mainly explored frontstage operations through investigating the work of fact-checkers, little is known about the assessment processes of organizations such as IFCN or EFCSN and how they evaluate the performances of fact-checking organizations. This paper turns backstage to get to know the personnel who check the fact-checkers. A thematic analysis shows that assessors are at times caught in a “neutrality dilemma” during evaluation processes. In addition, while assessment processes are oriented with standardized Codes of Conduct and contribute to the professionalization of fact-checking operations, the evaluation process is not always uniform. Lastly, participants raised concerns about the impact of platformization on fact-checking practices, where fact-checkers are pushed into dependency relations with big tech. Overall, this study lifts the curtain on the backstage operations that support fact-checking organizations in their attempt to be recognized as important actors in fighting disinformation.

Verhoeven, Emma; Van Leuven, Sarah

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2026.2685658pmid: N/A

Abstract As ethical self-regulating bodies and institutionalized intermediaries between journalism and the public, media councils translate journalistic norms into concrete standards. This study explores how these institutions adapt their workings and standards to digital journalism’s challenges. We conducted a multi-method study of nine European media councils (Belgium’s Dutch-speaking and French-speaking councils, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Ireland, North Macedonia, and Slovenia), combining qualitative content analysis of 152 complaints decisions in 2022 with nine in-depth interviews with council functionaries. Drawing on boundary work theory, we identify normative adaptation strategies across four domains: privacy concerns, corrections and rectifications, journalistic use of AI, and delineating journalistic actors. Both the nature and pace of adaptation vary across these domains, reflecting different perceived threats to journalistic authority. Most adaptation occurs reactively and pragmatically, although almost all councils are proactively outlining ethical use of AI – potentially because of its threat to journalism’s epistemic authority. The Danish enforcement of the right to be forgotten represents the most significant adaptive capacity, though it exists in tension with the advisory nature of most councils. Adaptation has largely occurred for online journalism in the traditional sense, with councils converging on explicit correction requirements, while remaining absent for social media corrections.

Wedel, Lion

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2026.2685660pmid: N/A

Abstract Social media has fundamentally altered what young adults consider news. However, a conceptual mismatch persists: what researchers consider news and journalistic actors often fails to align with what audiences perceive as such. Drawing on reception studies, this paper developes an audience-centered concept: informativeness. It describes the continuous space of a user’s subjective evaluation of media content as new and/or useful. To empirically unpack this concept, this study employed a two-step qualitative research design with eight focus groups of young German adults (ages 18–35). Findings show that audiences attribute informativeness through an encoding schema that is comprised of five core dimensions (informative practices and norms, relevance and relatability, actor-specific, usefulness, and platform-specific), which are flexibly applied beyond and independent of news and news media as a normative standard, and are adaptable to other online information spheres, such as misinformation, health guidance, or political information.