Digital Journalism

Wu, Shangyuan

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2025.2574927pmid: N/A

Abstract With increasing fake news, more governments are looking to enact laws to counter the spread of falsehoods online. Such moves however, have been met with much criticism, for their potential censorship of oppositional voices and threats to free speech and media freedom. For such a law to be successfully implemented, this paper argues that it must first be viewed as legitimate. The author delves into the concept of “legislative legitimacy”, binding it to three key aspects of perceived trustworthiness of the authorities, procedural justice, and shared values between the authorities and the people. It then studies how a government may build this legitimacy by focusing on Singapore, a country that enacted its anti-fake news law in 2019, which has been deemed as one of the world’s most comprehensive. A critical discourse analysis of 172 news articles reveals key strategies undertaken in the Singapore context at the discursive, material and ideological levels – pertaining to consistent government messaging in discursive terms, transparency in the material make-up and individual implementations of the law, and an ideological alignment with the people to maintain peace and stability in Singapore – presenting learning points on the legitimacy-building process of such policy interventions against fake news.

Plotner, Kayli; Ferrucci, Patrick

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2024.2404605pmid: N/A

Abstract This study utilizes both systems theory and Schein’s theory of organizational culture to understand how newsrooms can best mitigate forces negatively impacting the mental health of journalists. Through in-depth interviews with more than five dozen professional journalists, the study identifies four factors potentially affecting mental health: the profit drive of the news organization; the social media policies of the organization; the perceived level of job precarity within the newsroom; and the perceived decision-making power of newsroom leadership. Through theoretical analysis, the study then illustrates how organizations can enact a culture that potentially lessens the negative effects on mental health of these forces.

Olsen, Gunhild Ring

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2025.2487862pmid: N/A

Abstract This article applies the concept of work meaningfulness to bridge disparate literatures concerning journalists’ feelings toward their work. Highlighting the importance of both objective structures and subjective meaning-making capacities, it defines Meaning in Journalistic Work (MJoW) as the level of, and the interplay between, the structural and symbolic dimensions of autonomy, recognition, and a sense of belonging. The article posits that the structural dimension (workplace autonomy, good working conditions, and identification with the media organization) is deteriorating due to the digitalization of work. Consequently, the symbolic dimension (participation in autonomous meaning systems, acknowledgment from peers and the public, and professional affiliation) is gaining increased importance. By distinguishing between the structural and symbolic dimensions, and making the implicit connection between them explicit, the MJoW-framework offers a novel and comprehensive understanding of what makes digital reporting meaningful. Such an understanding is highly important at a time when journalism is constantly contested, working conditions are worsening, occurrences of threats and harassment are increasing, and work practices are being reshaped at record speed.

Björkenfeldt, Oscar

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2025.2601961pmid: N/A

Abstract This study investigates the multidimensional factors that shape self-censorship among journalists in the context of online harassment, with particular emphasis on emotional and psychological reactions, professional adaptation mechanisms, and structural support. Drawing on survey data from nearly 3,000 Swedish journalists, the findings show that internalized emotional responses—especially health-related consequences and anticipated regret—are the most decisive predictors of precautionary restraint. While attributes such as professional pride and perceived internal strength offer partial protection, the normalization of harassment within journalistic culture—often framed as adaptation—appears to reinforce rather than mitigate self-censorship. Structural support shows mixed effects: perceived judicial protection is associated with reduced self-censorship, collegial support shows more modest protective associations, and employer support fails to show a significant relationship. These results indicate that self-censorship is not merely a professional strategy, but an affectively driven adjustment shaped by broader organizational and cultural conditions. The study contributes to emerging debates on digital hostility and democratic resilience by clarifying how emotional anticipation interacts with structural vulnerabilities to constrain editorial autonomy.

Hameleers, Michael

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2026.2643289pmid: N/A

Abstract In a digital context characterized by declining content moderation, radical right-wing anti-immigration narratives abound and often get legitimized by political elites. To date, however, we know little about how anti-immigration discourse in a global context is constructed by right-wing alternative media, and how such platforms legitimize radical viewpoints through alternative truth claims and disinformation. Against this background, we rely on an extensive qualitative content analysis of X-messages posted by right-wing alternative media (N = 325) and responses to such posts by ordinary citizens (N = 200). Main findings indicate that the sampled alternative media often legitimize hostile views towards immigrants by interpreting isolated events as evidence for the collective exclusion of immigrants. By decontextualizing or falsely interpreting authentic visual materials, these platforms rely on disinformation techniques that contribute to the legitimization of out-group hate and negative stereotyping, a pattern that was amplified by the analysis of hostile responses to disinformation constructed by alternative media.

Kim, Dam Hee; Kenski, Kate; Jones-Jang, S. Mo

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2025.2556183pmid: N/A

Abstract Although prior studies demonstrate that less politically sophisticated citizens tend to fall for “fake news,” it is less clear how high need for cognition citizens who enjoy effortful thinking are influenced by misinformation. To address this gap, the current study analyzes data from a two-wave panel survey collected before and after the 2020 presidential election in the U.S. Our model explains (a) how social media news use increases political cynicism through perceived misinformation exposure and (b) how need for cognition shapes this path to cynicism. Results suggest that the path to political cynicism emerges only among high need for cognition individuals. These supposedly sophisticated citizens grow cynical not only toward politicians and the media, but also toward voters.

Stubenvoll, Marlis; Freiling, Isabelle; Matthes, Jörg

doi: 10.1080/21670811.2025.2501612pmid: N/A

Abstract At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals strongly relied on legacy media for current information. At the same time, parts of the population grew increasingly critical of the evidence presented in legacy media, leading them to resist reported facts. This study examines how and under which circumstances audiences resist journalistic evidence and adopt misperceptions about COVID-19. We theorize that citizens’ perceptions of elite manipulative intent drive resistance against legacy media reporting on COVID-19 and COVID-19 misperceptions. We tested this relationship across two panel studies in Austria. In Study 1 (N Time1 = 731, N Time2 = 416), we found that perceptions of elite manipulative intent only explained citizens’ misperceptions when their level of anxiety was low. In Study 2 (NTime1 = 912, NTime2 = 511), we reexamined this relationship and additionally included four resistance strategies against legacy media reporting as potential mediators. We found that perceptions of elite manipulative intent spurred counterarguing against and source derogation of legacy media. Overall, our findings suggest that citizens’ suspicion that elites have ulterior motives helps explain individuals resisting reported facts on COVID-19 and adopting alternative narratives.