Independent media
Independent media refers to any media, such as television, newspapers, or Internet-based publications, that is free of influence by government or corporate interests. The term has varied applications.
Independence stands as a cornerstone principle within media policy and the freedom of the press, representing an "essentially contested concept". The concept is often used to denote, declare, or claim independence from state-control, market forces, or conventions. And, media organisations and individuals assert their legitimacy and credibility through it.[1]
In various discussions, such as those regarding the role of media within authoritarian societies or the relevance of European public service broadcasters or the "alternative press", the concept of independence is interpreted diversely.[1] In international development, the term independent media is used for the development of new media outlets, particularly in areas where there is little to no existing media presence.
Additionally, digital transformations tend to compromise the press as a common good (with a blurring of the difference between journalism and advertising) by the technological, political and social dynamics that it brings.[2] For this reason other norms, such as transparency and participation, may be condidered to be more relevant.[3][4]
Research has found that independent media plays an important role in improving government accountability and reducing corruption.[5][6][7][8][9][10]
Overview[edit]
Two factors tend to influence media independence. The disruption and crisis in business models that have supported print and broadcast media for decades have left traditional media outlets more vulnerable to external influences as they seek to establish new revenue sources. In many regions, austerity measures have led to large-scale budget cuts of public service broadcasters, dislocating employees and limiting innovation in programming.
An indicator of a lack of independence is the level of public trust in the credibility of journalism. According to the Edelman Trust Barometer, trust in media seems to be declining, reflecting declines of trust in government, business and NGOs.[11] Since 2012, online media has become more and more popular, gaining trust throughout the world, but for Mindi Chahal, awareness on the risk of "fake-news", filter bubbles and algorithms have begun to change perceptions of the credibility of online information.[12] Anya Schiffrin says that despite the initial optimism that social media would reduce such tendencies by enabling broader citizen participation in media, there are growing signals that social media are similarly susceptible to political capture and polarization, further impacting on the trust that users may have towards information on these platforms.[13]
Media regulators' impact on the editorial independence of the media, which is still deeply entwined with political and economic influences and pressures. Private media – functioning outside of governments' control and with minimum official regulation – are still dependent on advertising support, risking potential misuse of advertisers as a political tool by larger advertisers such as governments.[14]
New technologies have added new meaning to what constitutes media independence. The collection, selection, aggregation, synthesis and processing of data are now increasingly delegated to forms of automation. While the sharing of social media posts is crucial in elevating the importance of certain news sources or stories, what appears in individual news feeds on platforms such as Facebook or news aggregators such as Google News is the product of other forces as well. This includes algorithmic calculations, which remove professional editorial judgment, in favor of past consumption patterns by the individual user and his/her social network. In 2016, users declared preferring algorithms over editors for selecting the news they wanted to read.[15] Despite apparent neutrality algorithms may often compromise editorial integrity, and have been found to lead to discrimination against people based on their race, socio-economic situation and geographic location.[16][17]