Algorithmic Gatekeeping and Journalistic Ethics: A Cross-Regional Analysis of Public-Facing Media Texts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54536/jmjmc.v2i1.8805Keywords:
Algorithmic Gatekeeping, Digital Journalism, Journalistic Ethics, Media Framing, Platform PowerAbstract
As digital platforms increasingly shape how news is distributed and encountered, algorithmic systems have become important gatekeepers of public information. This study examines how public-facing media texts frame algorithmic gatekeeping and its implications for journalistic ethics across Africa, Asia, Europe, and North America. Guided by media framing theory, the study uses qualitative textual analysis to examine 23 media texts published between 2018 and 2026. The analysis identified four major themes: algorithmic amplification of misinformation, gatekeeping crisis and loss of accountability, threats to democracy and civil dialogue, and media pushback and adaptation strategies. Findings show that algorithms are commonly framed as powerful and often opaque intermediaries that influence news visibility, intensify engagement-driven information environments, and reduce traditional newsroom control over distribution. However, regional differences emerged. North American texts emphasized misinformation, polarization, and public discourse; African texts focused more strongly on information sovereignty, media sustainability, and unequal platform power; Asian texts emphasized search dependence, publisher revenue, copyright, and visibility; while European texts highlighted regulation, transparency, and publisher independence. Across regions, proposed responses included adapting content to platform environments, strengthening direct audience relationships, developing publisher-controlled technologies, increasing algorithmic accountability, and pursuing policy intervention. The study demonstrates that algorithmic gatekeeping is framed not simply as a technological change, but as a broader struggle over journalistic authority, visibility, economic sustainability, public trust, and democratic communication.
References
Abdulrauf, H., Lawal, A. A., Mba, A. N. U., Ademola, C., Yusuf, Z. B., Babatayo, S., & Ayinde, I. (2025). Artificial intelligence in journalism: A narrative review of opportunities, challenges, ethical tensions, and human-machine collaboration. American Journal of Arts and Human Science, 4(4), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajahs.v4i4.5963
Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160
Carlson, M. (2018). Automating judgment? Algorithmic judgment, news knowledge, and journalistic professionalism. New Media & Society, 20(5), 1755–1772. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817706684
Chidozie, O. E. (2025). Building resilience against disinformation: Media literacy and digital hygiene interventions for Nigerian youth. Journal of Media, Journalism & Mass Communication, 1(1), 9–16. https://doi.org/10.54536/jmjmc.v1i1.4827
Deuze, M. (2005). What is journalism? Professional identity and ideology of journalists reconsidered. Journalism, 6(4), 442–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884905056815
DeVito, M. A. (2017). From editors to algorithms: A values-based approach to understanding story selection in the Facebook News Feed. Digital Journalism, 5(6), 753–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1178592
Diakopoulos, N. (2015). Algorithmic accountability: Journalistic investigation of computational power structures. Digital Journalism, 3(3), 398–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.976411
Dörr, K. N., & Hollnbuchner, K. (2017). Ethical challenges of algorithmic journalism. Digital Journalism, 5(4), 404–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1167612
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
Guess, A. M., Malhotra, N., Pan, J., Barberá, P., Allcott, H., Brown, T., Crespo-Tenorio, A., Dimmery, D., Freelon, D., Gentzkow, M., González-Bailón, S., Kennedy, E., Kim, Y. M., Lazer, D., Moehler, D., Nyhan, B., Rivera, C. V., Settle, J., Thomas, D. R., … Tucker, J. A. (2023). How do social media feed algorithms affect attitudes and behavior in an election campaign? Science, 381(6656), 398–404. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abp9364
Hermida, A. (2010). Twittering the news: The emergence of ambient journalism. Journalism Practice, 4(3), 297–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512781003640703
Ittefaq, M., Zain, A., Arif, R., Ala-Uddin, M., Ahmad, T., & Iqbal, A. (2025). Global news media coverage of artificial intelligence (AI): A comparative analysis of frames, sentiments, and trends across 12 countries. Telematics and Informatics, 96, 102223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2024.102223
Lazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., Metzger, M. J., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., Schudson, M., Sloman, S. A., Sunstein, C. R., Thorson, E. A., Watts, D. J., & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094–1096. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2998
Mitova, E., Blassnig, S., Strikovic, E., Urman, A., Hannák, A., de Vreese, C. H., & Esser, F. (2023). News recommender systems: A programmatic research review. Annals of the International Communication Association, 47(1), 84–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2022.2142149
Møller, L. A. (2022). Between personal and public interest: How algorithmic news recommendation reconciles with journalism as an ideology. Digital Journalism, 10(10), 1794–1812. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2022.2032782
Nguyen, D. (2023). How news media frame data risks in their coverage of big data and AI. Internet Policy Review, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.14763/2023.2.1708
Nguyen, D., & Hekman, E. (2024). The news framing of artificial intelligence: A critical exploration of how media discourses make sense of automation. AI & Society, 39, 437–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01511-1
Nielsen, R. K., & Ganter, S. A. (2018). Dealing with digital intermediaries: A case study of the relations between publishers and platforms. New Media & Society, 20(4), 1600–1617. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817701318
Olley, W. O., & Ikerodah, J. O. (2025). Emotional and social barriers to engaging in misinformation correction on social media: A qualitative study. American Journal of Arts and Human Science, 4(3), 142–148. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajahs.v4i3.5683
Poell, T., Nieborg, D., & van Dijck, J. (2019). Platformisation. Internet Policy Review, 8(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.4.1425
Raza, S., & Ding, C. (2022). News recommender system: A review of recent progress, challenges, and opportunities. Artificial Intelligence Review, 55, 749–800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-021-10043-x
Scheffauer, R., Goyanes, M., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2024). Social media algorithmic versus professional journalists’ news selection: Effects of gate keeping on traditional and social media news trust. Journalism, 25(4), 755-778. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231179804
Singer, J. B. (2007). Contested autonomy: Professional and popular claims on journalistic norms. Journalism Studies, 8(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700601056866
Tandoc, E. C., Jr. (2014). Journalism is twerking? How web analytics is changing the process of gatekeeping. New Media & Society, 16(4), 559–575. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814530541
Tandoc, E. C., Jr., & Thomas, R. J. (2015). The ethics of web analytics: Implications of using audience metrics in news construction. Digital Journalism, 3(2), 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.909122
Tandoc, E. C., Jr., & Vos, T. P. (2016). The journalist is marketing the news: Social media in the gatekeeping process. Journalism Practice, 10(8), 950–966. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2015.1087811
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Chidalu Nnorukah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
