Journalistic autonomy on platforms
Journalistic autonomy on platforms
This doctoral thesis investigates how algorithmic recommendation systems influence editorial decisions in climate reporting. The aim is to safeguard journalistic autonomy and to develop practical recommendations for dealing with metrics.
| PhD students: | Vanessa Kokoschka |
| Supervisors: | Prof. Dr Lars Rademacher, Prof. Dr Kawa Nazemi |
| Duration: | December 2022 to June 2026 |
Climate change, as a systemic challenge, affects all areas of our society. Climate journalism plays a crucial role in supporting the process of sustainable development through communication: it has the necessary tools, methods and strategies to simplify complex issues, communicate them effectively and raise public awareness (Bonfadelli / Schäfer 2017: 317).
At the same time, news consumption – particularly amongst teenagers and young adults – is increasingly taking place via commercial platforms such as social media (Newman et al. 2024). As a result, climate journalism formats have emerged that are produced, distributed and consumed exclusively for and on social media platforms. However, to achieve reach, newsrooms must align themselves with the platforms’ algorithmic recommendation systems and operational logic. These algorithmic constraints can affect the entire journalistic value chain whilst simultaneously strengthening the platforms’ position. This can lead to a relationship of tension and dependency between editorial teams and platform providers, and poses challenges to journalistic autonomy (Eichler 2022; Lamot & Paulussen 2020; Lischka 2021).
Research questions
The following research questions arise from the problem described above:
- What influence do the metrics used by platforms have on editorial decisions in climate journalism?
- How is climate journalism content designed during production and for distribution on platforms?
- What role do content-based and collaborative recommendation systems play in journalistic practice?
- How do editorial teams deal with the conflict between their journalistic autonomy and adapting to algorithmic logic?
Methodology
To answer the research questions outlined above, a qualitative mixed-methods approach is employed:
- Qualitative content analysis: Through a content analysis of selected climate journalism formats on Instagram, TikTok and YouTube, the characteristics of platformisation are identified and examined.
- Editorial observations: Observing selected editorial teams will provide insights into how they deal with platform logic and explore the significance of these algorithmically calculated metrics in editorial decision-making.
- Semi-structured interviews: Semi-structured interviewsare used to investigate the understanding of metrics and algorithmic recommendation systems that underpin journalistic work, and to identify the concerns interviewees have regarding their journalistic autonomy on platforms.
Steps taken so far
Initially, a qualitative content analysis was carried out on the following formats on the platforms Instagram, TikTok and YouTube: NowThisEarth (NowThis Media), Planet A (Deutsche Welle), klima:neutral (objektiv media in cooperation with the KLIMA ARENA Climate Foundation for Citizens), klima.taz (taz, die tageszeitung), klima.neutral (WDR) and 2050.magazin (Burda Verlag). In addition, editorial observations were carried out at Planet A and klima.neutral. Finally, interviews were conducted with editors from the aforementioned editorial teams, as well as other science and climate journalists and content creators specialising in climate communication.
The results show that the specific dynamics of the respective platforms influence the design and structure of the posts, but not the choice of topics. Editorial teams retain their journalistic autonomy over the latter. With regard to narrative structure, this primarily means creating as gripping an opening as possible for social media posts and, particularly in the case of videos, offering a high level of dynamism with plenty of visual variety – for example, through animations or simulated experiments – in order to explain climate science concepts.
Furthermore, it is possible to identify certain strategies that editorial teams use in an attempt to place climate-related content as successfully as possible on these platforms, for example by deliberately avoiding certain keywords such as ‘climate’. One person drew a comparison with parents’ attempts to encourage their children to eat more vegetables:
“There’s a comparison I like to use when you want a child to eat broccoli. You don’t just tell your child, ‘This is broccoli. It’s good for your health. Eat it.’ The child will say, ‘No, no, go away with your broccoli,’ and you’ll have to get creative and find a way to get your child to eat that broccoli. So it’s a similar thing that we do on our TikTok. Whilst covering stories, we try to speak the language of the platform whilst discussing topics that aren’t typically found on the platform.”
Overall, although editorial teams select topics based on journalistic criteria, they simultaneously adapt to the logic of the platforms. Due to measures taken by the platforms – such as the algorithmic throttling of political content on Instagram – editorial teams are constantly having to rebalance their editorial strategies.
Objective
This doctoral project makes an important contribution from both an academic and a practical perspective. From an academic perspective, it expands research into climate journalism, which has so far focused primarily on linear media such as print and television (Schäfer & Painter 2021). The field of reporting on climate change on social media still has significant gaps in research, which this doctoral project aims to close, at least in part.
Furthermore, the findings are also significant for professional journalistic experience: it appears that whilst editorial teams rate the relevance of climate change to their reporting as high, there is a noticeable reluctance to engage with the topic. Furthermore, there are indications of a backlash, with climate and sustainability featuring less prominently in media coverage (Kokoschka 2025). The findings of the doctoral studies can help to develop new formats and approaches to reporting, with a view to increasing both the reach and the impact of climate reporting on social media platforms.
References
Bonfadelli, Heinz; Schäfer, Mike S. (2017): Environmental and Climate Change Communication. In: Bonfadelli H., Fähnrich B., Lüthje C., Milde J., Rhomberg M., Schäfer M. (eds.) Research Field: Science Communication, Springer VS, Wiesbaden: 315–338.
Newman, Nic; Fletcher, Richard; Robertson, Craig T.; Arguedas, Amy Ross; Nielsen, Rasmus Kleis (2024): Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2024. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford.
Eichler, Henning (2022): Journalism on social media – Are ARD and ZDF under the spell of algorithms? Otto Brenner Foundation, Frankfurt am Main.
Kokoschka, Vanessa (2025): Climate Journalism on Social Media. A cross-platform comparison of climate journalism formats for young audiences on Instagram, TikTok and YouTube. In: Kokoschka, Vanessa; Kosak, Stefan; Paganini, Claudia; Rademacher, Lars (eds.): Sustainability in Media Communication. Ethical Requirements and Practical Solutions, Nomos Verlag, Baden-Baden.
Lamot, Kenza; Paulussen, Steve (2020): Six uses of analytics: Digital editors’ perceptions of audience analytics in the newsroom. Journalism Practice, vol. 14, no. 3: 358–373.
Lischka, Juliane A. (2021). Logics in social media news making: How social media editors reconcile Facebook’s logic with journalistic standards. Journalism, vol. 22, no. 2, 430–447.
Schäfer, Mike S.; Painter, James (2021): Climate journalism in a changing media ecosystem: Assessing the production of climate change‐related news around the world. In: WIREs Clim Change 12 (1).
