essay on role of media and democracy

Essay on Role of Media in Democracy

Students are often asked to write an essay on Role of Media in Democracy in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Role of Media in Democracy

Introduction.

Media is a pillar of democracy. It informs the public, promotes transparency, and encourages citizen participation.

Media as an Informer

Media and transparency.

Media exposes corruption and misuse of power. It holds leaders accountable, ensuring they serve public interest.

Media and Participation

Through debates and discussions, media encourages citizens to participate in democratic processes. It gives voice to the voiceless.

250 Words Essay on Role of Media in Democracy

Media, often hailed as the ‘Fourth Pillar’ of democracy, plays a pivotal role in shaping a healthy democracy. It is the backbone of a democracy, as it helps shape public opinion and influence the direction in which a society progresses.

Media as a Watchdog

Media’s primary role in a democracy is to act as a watchdog. It ensures the government’s accountability and transparency, scrutinizing its policies and decisions. By exposing corruption, inefficiency, and injustice, it empowers citizens to demand better governance.

Media as a Platform for Dialogue

Media also facilitates a healthy exchange of ideas, opinions, and criticisms. It provides a platform where different viewpoints can be expressed and heard, fostering a culture of debate and discussion, which is integral to a thriving democracy.

The Role of Media in Elections

Media’s role becomes particularly significant during elections. By providing comprehensive and unbiased information about candidates, their policies, and their performance, media allows voters to make informed choices, strengthening the electoral process.

Challenges and Conclusion

However, the power of media also poses challenges. Issues like fake news, media bias, and sensationalism can undermine its role in a democracy. Thus, it is crucial to promote media literacy, ethics, and regulations to ensure that media continues to serve as a pillar of democracy. Despite these challenges, it is undeniable that media plays a critical role in the functioning and preservation of democracy.

500 Words Essay on Role of Media in Democracy

The role of media in ensuring transparency.

In a democratic setup, media acts as a watchdog, keeping a vigilant eye on the actions of the government and other public figures. It investigates, exposes, and challenges any instances of corruption, malpractice, or abuse of power. By reporting on such issues, the media ensures accountability and transparency, thereby strengthening the democratic fabric of the society.

Media as a Platform for Debate and Discussion

Media also provides a platform for public debate and discussion. It encourages the exchange of ideas, opinions, and perspectives, which is crucial for the democratic process. Through news, talk shows, and panel discussions, media allows diverse viewpoints to be heard, fostering a culture of tolerance and mutual respect.

Media and Voter Awareness

One of the key roles of the media in a democracy is to educate the electorate. The media disseminates information about the policies and performances of political parties, enabling voters to make informed decisions. It also raises awareness about the importance of voting and the electoral process, thereby promoting political participation.

Media and Social Change

Challenges and the way forward.

Despite its crucial role, the media in a democracy faces several challenges. These include issues like media bias, sensationalism, and the influence of corporate and political interests. To overcome these challenges, there is a need for stringent regulations to ensure media independence and objectivity. Media literacy should also be promoted to enable the public to critically analyze media content.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Media and Democracy: The Long View

• Marc F. Plattner

Select your citation format:

Read the full essay here .

We are living in the midst of a communications revolution that is likely to have significant effects on democracy. Though it is too soon to know where this revolution will lead, it is an opportune moment for a broader historical inquiry into the relationship between democracy and the media. Representative democracy was born in the era of print media, but over the past century it has accommodated the rise of broadcasting and now is being shaped by new communications technologies. As a result, we seem to be heading toward a more pluralistic but also more fragmented media environment that may pose a threat to the shared civic arena essential to democracy.

About the Author

Marc F. Plattner  is a member of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) Board of Directors. He was on the NED staff from 1984 until 2020, serving first as the director of the grants program. In 1989, he became founding coeditor (with Larry Diamond) of the Journal of Democracy. He later served as codirector of the International Forum for Democratic Studies and as NED’s vice-president for research and studies.

View all work by Marc F. Plattner

Further Reading

Volume 30, Issue 3

Egyptian Youth’s Digital Dissent

• Adel Iskandar

The military-backed regime of President al-Sisi seems secure, but study of the Egyptian internet reveals that the regime has failed to win over the young.

Volume 11, Issue 4

Societal Accountability in Latin America

• Catalina Smulovitz
• Enrique Peruzzotti

Recent studies of democracy in Latin America overlook the role of civil society as an agent of accountability.

Volume 32, Issue 2

Making the Internet Safe for Democracy

• Francis Fukuyama

The outsized power of large internet platforms to amplify or silence certain voices poses a grave threat to democracy. Finding a reliable way to dilute that power offers the best…

• A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Political Science

Volume 6, 2003, review article, t he m edia and d emocracy : beyond myths and stereotypes.

• Doris Graber 1
• View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: Department of Political Science, University of Illinois, 1007 W. Harrison Street, Chicago, Illinois 60607-7137; email: [email protected]
• Vol. 6:139-160 (Volume publication date June 2003) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.6.121901.085707
• First published as a Review in Advance on December 08, 2002
• © Annual Reviews

This essay's point of departure is the hallowed belief that democracy requires active citizens and news media that supply them with information they need to participate effectively in politics. The main features of this model of a functioning democracy, including the underlying assumptions, are tested and found wanting. Neither citizens nor media are capable of performing the roles expected of them. The appropriateness of these roles for life in modern societies is also open to question, as are the many myths and stereotypes that obscure the interface between media and democracy. The fact that democracy can persist despite citizens and media that fall short of the expected performance suggests that political culture may be more important than citizen wisdom and media excellence. Rallies in civic activism during crises may also be a major factor in the durability of democratic governance in the United States.

Article metrics loading...

Full text loading...

• Article Type: Review Article

Most Read This Month

Most cited most cited rss feed, framing theory, discursive institutionalism: the explanatory power of ideas and discourse, historical institutionalism in comparative politics, the origins and consequences of affective polarization in the united states, political trust and trustworthiness, public attitudes toward immigration, what have we learned about the causes of corruption from ten years of cross-national empirical research, what do we know about democratization after twenty years, economic determinants of electoral outcomes, public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: a review of the empirical literature.

Publication Date: 01 Jun 2003

Online Option

Get immediate access to your online copy - available in PDF and ePub formats

12.1 The Media as a Political Institution: Why Does It Matter?

Learning outcomes.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Explain the importance of a free press both in the United States and abroad.
• Describe how the media acts as a watchdog and give examples.
• Understand and define how political information is mediated.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. —The 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution

The press is the only profession explicitly protected in the United States Constitution. Many attribute this protection to James Madison and his writings in the Federalist Papers , but the idea of a free press stretches back to well before Madison wrote out his ideas on what constitutes a perfect democracy. The origins of the free press in the United States can be traced back to Cato’s letters , a collection of essays written in the 1720s by two British writers, John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon . Using the pseudonym Cato, they published their articles in the British press, criticizing the British monarchy for its corruption and tyrannical practices. Decades later, American colonists felt the effects of these letters during their own struggles against the Crown, 1 and in 1776, Virginia became the first state to formally adopt a constitutional provision to protect press freedom. 2 Why is the idea of protecting the press so embedded in the United States’ concept of government, and why is this concept so important? Do other nations protect the media to the same extent, or even more? The next section will examine these questions.

The Fourth Estate and Freedom of the Press

The importance of a free press can be boiled down to a sentence from esteemed University of Illinois at Chicago lecturer Doris Graber ’s seminal work Mass Media and American Politics : “The mass media . . . serve as powerful guardians of political norms because the American people believe that a free press should keep them informed about the wrongdoings of government.” 3 Another common way of defining the media’s role is to say that it acts as the fourth estate , or the unofficial fourth branch of government that checks the others. The term fourth estate is credited to Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle , who wrote, “Burke said there were Three Estates in Parliament; but, in the Reporter’s Gallery yonder, there sat a Fourth Estate more important far than they all.” 4 In other words, people look to the media—the fourth estate—to keep the government in check. The role of the media must be protected if it is to carry out that task.

Throughout US history, the media has fulfilled this role as intended. In the late 1960s, Rand Corporation analyst Daniel Ellsberg provided classified documents to the New York Times and the Washington Post proving that the government was concealing protracted military involvement in the Vietnam War. The New York Times withstood government pressure and a Supreme Court case to go on to publish a series of articles now known as the Pentagon Papers , which revealed the extent to which the American public had been lied to about the country’s progress in that war. The Watergate scandal is perhaps the most famous example of press freedom and the role of the press as watchdog (another term for the fourth estate ). In this instance, a government informant known as Deep Throat fed Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein confidential information about then president Richard Nixon’s corrupt campaign practices. An ensuing series of investigative pieces by the two journalists revealed multiple abuses of power in Nixon’s reelection campaign, and their reporting ultimately led to the indictment of multiple presidential aides and the eventual resignation of the president himself.

In this video clip, investigative journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, editor Barry Sussman, and former executive editor Ben Bradlee recall how, when they worked for the Washington Post in 1972, they broke the story of the Watergate scandal, a story that started with an investigation of a break-in at a Washington, DC, hotel and led to a constitutional crisis, the resignation of President Richard Nixon, and almost 50 criminal convictions.

In the case of the Pentagon Papers, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that the president’s argument—that prior restraint 5 was necessary in order to protect national security—was not enough “to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment ,” 6 and this is the most important First Amendment case because it addresses the sweeping right of the press and press protections in the 20th century. Watergate showed how a protected press is free to serve one of its main purposes, which is to reveal government misconduct. New Yorker staff writer Richard Harris wrote at the time that, “The press was potentially Mr. Nixon’s enemy—far more than the courts or Congress, because only the press could dig out and tell the story (whatever help reporters might get from the courts or Congress) in a way that would arouse the people to demand an accounting.” 7

Watchdogs do not have to be journalistic behemoths like the New York Times or the Washington Post. In the United Kingdom, a small, independent newspaper called the Rochdale Alternative Paper revealed decades-long abuse allegations against Liberal Party MP 8 Cyril Smith . The exposé in the paper, which had a circulation of 8,000 at its highest, 9 eventually led to both a police and an independent government investigation into a child abuse ring that involved several high-level government officials, including MP Peter Morrison, the private secretary to then prime minister Margaret Thatcher . 10 Another way to understand the watchdog function of the press is through the term muckraker , referring to reform-minded investigative journalists during the Progressive Era in the United States (late 1800s to early 1900s) who exposed the wrongdoings of industry leaders. One famous example of a muckraker was Upton Sinclair , who wrote the novel The Jungle based on the corrupt and inhumane practices in American meatpacking companies at the turn of the 20th century. The publication of The Jungle led to governmental action on food safety. In his 1919 work The Brass Check , Sinclair exposed the journalism industry’s penchant for yellow journalism , or journalism that relies on catchy titles and human interest stories to drive sales over well-researched articles or pieces on civic affairs. Sinclair was not afraid to take on media titans such as William Randolph Hearst , who owned the nation’s largest chain of newspapers at the time.

Watchdogs and muckrakers act as a check on government action and corruption. They play an important part in exercising the role of a free press as a cornerstone of a functioning democracy. As Yale University professor and member of the Council on Foreign Relations Timothy Snyder writes, “If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power, because there is no basis upon which to do so.” 11 The media allows the public to understand what is happening in government in order to hold elected officials accountable. Or, perhaps more simply put, “A free press is important because it is the freedom upon which all of our other freedoms are contingent.” 12

How free is the press? The answer is not black and white, as evidenced by the 2021 World Press Freedom Index . Published every year by Reporters Without Borders , the Freedom Index measures freedom in 180 countries “based on an evaluation of pluralism, independence of the media, quality of legislative framework and safety of journalists in each country and region.” 13 The map in Figure 12.3 below shows that the press is freer in some countries (in pink and purple on the map) than in others (in blue and green).

According to the index and as reflected in the map, Norway, Finland, Sweden, and Denmark have the freest presses in the world. Notably, Norway tries to discourage media concentration in order to ensure a variety of outlets, something that will be discussed in later parts of this chapter. The 2021 index ranked the United States 44th, after South Africa (32nd), Botswana (38th), and South Korea (42nd).

George Mason University professor Sam Lebovic explains that two main factors, the rise of concentration in ownership and increased state secrecy, are responsible for the inadequacy of press freedom in the United States, which is an ongoing and serious problem. 14 The modern US media faces unprecedented struggles against declining viewership and revenues, which work to limit the number of outlets and decrease the number of working journalists. At the same time, legislation such as the Patriot Act , passed after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, has made it more difficult for the press to verify state information because of increasing pressure on sources not to cooperate and prosecution of journalists who do ascertain information. In addition, the Trump administration further hampered press freedoms through the prosecution of news sources, public statements that discredited journalists, and encouragement of foreign leaders to take steps to restrict their own media. 15 The future of press freedom in America, while still unstable due to media concentration and surveillance laws such as the Patriot Act, may show some signs of improvement; in a speech on Press Freedom Day in 2021, President Joe Biden decried the imprisonment of 274 reporters worldwide, criticized the lack of local media outlets, and said that the United States “recognize[s] the integral role a free press plays in building prosperous, resilient, and free societies.” 16 Despite these laudatory comments about a free press, however, it is clear the United States faces challenges in protecting journalists’ ability to fulfill their roles.

A study of the United States and Latin America provides an example of how this idea of the importance of a free press is shared across cultures. In the study, journalists representing both cultures shared a common definition of a free press as one that functions without government pressure and to promote social and economic development. 17 This study considered whether or not a free press is related to increased economic development, a question that to date has not been conclusively answered. While the notion that political freedoms (such as freedom of the press) should naturally encourage economic growth and increased standards of living is a common one, current research has not found conclusive evidence either supporting or refuting the claim. 18

There is more of a consensus on the benefits of a free press when it comes to preventing corruption. Studies of press freedom around the world, conducted by scholars in England, Argentina, and Australia, confirm this theory. 19 In this way, the watchdog role that the press plays is based on democratic ideals and has real-world effects for the public.

The Mediated Nature of Political Information

The political information most people receive is mediated information . What does this mean? Unless they work directly in government, most citizen’s understanding of politics comes completely from the media, whether via television news, podcasts, or social media feeds. The media may be a gatekeeper, but it is also a storyteller. As such, it is important to realize that what people see in the media is actually a manufactured view of the political world. Journalists and others who create the news follow routines and are influenced by institutional values that manifest themselves in media content. As Columbia University professor Herbert Gans writes in his study of the American media, “The news does not limit itself to reality judgments; it also contains values, or preference statements. This in turn makes it possible to suggest that there is, underlying the news, a picture of nation and society as it ought to be.” 20 Gans acknowledges that professional journalists try to be objective, yet the news does in fact make judgments and value statements. For example, crime news alerts viewers to the idea that there are undesirable actors within society and that criminals should be punished. Judgments and value statements such as these are different from political bias; while some news outlets are overtly liberal or conservative, Gans’s study shows that the media produces stories with cultural values that people may not detect because they are so used to seeing stories presented this way. For example, according to Gans, ethnocentrism and altruistic democracy are two of the key enduring values in the news. Ethnocentrism in the news refers to the idea that the American media values the United States above all other nations. This manifests most obviously in war coverage, where the press rarely questions American involvement—and to do so would be unpatriotic. In a similar vein, Gans explains that the American news media emphasize an altruistic democracy , the ideal held up by the media that politics should be based on public service and for the public interest. 21 In these ways, the news makes statements about what is right and what is wrong and presents political news through these lenses.

Journalists also share other professional values as to what makes a “good” news story, such as proximity, negativity, scope (how big is the story?), timeliness, and unexpectedness (novelty). 22 Because journalists share these professional values, there is a certain homogeneous quality to the news, otherwise known as pack journalism . This means that people receive the same type of news story repeatedly, though this has been changing since the advent of online news, a topic that will be discussed later in the chapter. Journalists’ common ideas about what should be in the news and why color their coverage and presentation of the news—and, as a result, the public’s perception of politics.

It is important here to note that the concept of news values differs across countries—what is newsworthy in the United States may not be in other nations—and the role of the media differs as well. A study on the news in Japan found that strong cultural forces and local needs drive how news is produced and delivered. 23 Other scholars have found that Western news organizations highlight human interest stories, while Arabic news focuses more on social responsibility and Islamic values. 24 University of Leicester Professor Vincent Campbell echoes the sentiment that news organizations in different countries are fueled by different values and that this influences what stories their audiences see. In authoritarian countries, journalists focus less on performing the watchdog role and more on promoting state activities. 25 This is the case in countries such as North Korea and China, where the state government runs the media.

Related to the idea that the media in large part decides what is a good news story is the concept of the media’s gatekeeping role and its agenda-setting powers. In other words, according to agenda-setting theory , the media decides both what to ignore or filter out and what to show the public. As University of Texas professor Maxwell McCombs and University of North Carolina professor Donald Shaw write, “In choosing and displaying news, editors, newsroom staff, and broadcasters play an important part in shaping political reality. Readers learn not only about a given issue, but also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position.” 26 Whether it is a producer who selects the topics for the evening news or an algorithm that creates a social media news feed, people know what is “news” by what is fed to them, they know what is important based on how often it gets airtime, and they understand that there are lead stories and stories that don’t matter very much. The public doesn’t make these decisions; professionals within the news industry make them for the public. (Later parts of this chapter will discuss how this power dynamic has changed thanks to social media and how, in many ways, it is no longer media professionals who select what the public sees.)

If the media decides which stories to present, it also has a hand in deciding how stories are presented. According to framing theory , the way the media frames political information can affect people’s understanding of it. University of Illinois professor David Tewksbury and University of Wisconsin professor Dietram A. Scheufele explain:

“Artists know that the frame placed around a painting can affect how viewers interpret and react to the painting itself. . . . Journalists—often subconsciously—engage in essentially the same process when they decide how to describe the political world. They choose images and words that have the power to influence how audiences interpret and evaluate issues and policies.” 27

For example, a study on gubernatorial races found that female candidates were more likely to be framed in terms of personal characteristics than their male counterparts, who were more likely to be framed in terms of their positions on policy issues. 28 In a separate study, researchers found that one common way the Dutch national media framed news on the European Union (EU) was in terms of assigning responsibility for social problems to the government. This study suggests that the Dutch media’s presentation of political news reflects the public expectation that the government will provide social welfare programs. 29 By highlighting certain aspects of a story and ignoring others, frames can affect people’s judgments and opinions on policy issues, and just as with agenda setting, elected officials fight to make sure they are framed in the correct light.

The public, and individual viewers, should know that while the media is a critical tool that aids people’s political decision-making, it is guided by professional values that dictate the content. Individuals’ views on politics can sometimes be out of their control, but they can work to assemble a better picture of the world by turning to a variety of media outlets and becoming aware of what goes into story selection. While internal pressures (such as professional norms) or external forces (such as authoritarian governments) can influence how the media portrays information, ownership can also affect what the public sees. The next section will examine the different types of media—and, perhaps more importantly, who owns them and how this affects their role in the political world.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-political-science/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Mark Carl Rom, Masaki Hidaka, Rachel Bzostek Walker
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Introduction to Political Science
• Publication date: May 18, 2022
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-political-science/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-political-science/pages/12-1-the-media-as-a-political-institution-why-does-it-matter

© Jan 3, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

The Functions of the Media for Democracy

Cite this chapter.

• Lisa Müller  

Part of the book series: Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century series ((CDC))

387 Accesses

Normative standards or roles that define how institutions which hold a specific function in society should operate serve well as benchmarks to evaluate their actual performance (McQuail 1992: 17; Norris and Odugbemi 2010: 12). Hence, this chapter aims to clarify the normative standards of democratic media performance in order to avoid the ‘theoretical vacuum’ of many previous comparative media studies (Hallin and Mancini 2012b: 214). In other words, to carry out a systematic analysis of mass media’s contribution to democracy, it is first of all necessary to identify the functions that media are supposed to fulfill in a democracy. This further requires specifying how the media’s compliance with such functions manifests itself in reality, that is, how their democratic performance can be empirically observed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2014 Lisa Müller

About this chapter

Müller, L. (2014). The Functions of the Media for Democracy. In: Comparing Mass Media in Established Democracies. Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137391384_3

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137391384_3

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London

Print ISBN : 978-1-349-48293-1

Online ISBN : 978-1-137-39138-4

eBook Packages : Palgrave Political Science Collection Political Science and International Studies (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Democracy, Social Media, and Freedom of Expression: Hate, Lies, and the Search for the Possible Truth

• Share Chicago Journal of International Law | Democracy, Social Media, and Freedom of Expression: Hate, Lies, and the Search for the Possible Truth on Facebook
• Share Chicago Journal of International Law | Democracy, Social Media, and Freedom of Expression: Hate, Lies, and the Search for the Possible Truth on Twitter
• Share Chicago Journal of International Law | Democracy, Social Media, and Freedom of Expression: Hate, Lies, and the Search for the Possible Truth on Email
• Share Chicago Journal of International Law | Democracy, Social Media, and Freedom of Expression: Hate, Lies, and the Search for the Possible Truth on LinkedIn

Download PDF

This Essay is a critical reflection on the impact of the digital revolution and the internet on three topics that shape the contemporary world: democracy, social media, and freedom of expression. Part I establishes historical and conceptual assumptions about constitutional democracy and discusses the role of digital platforms in the current moment of democratic recession. Part II discusses how, while social media platforms have revolutionized interpersonal and social communication and democratized access to knowledge and information, they also have led to an exponential spread of mis- and disinformation, hate speech, and conspiracy theories. Part III proposes a framework that balances regulation of digital platforms with the countervailing fundamental right to freedom of expression, a right that is essential for human dignity, the search for the possible truth, and democracy. Part IV highlights the role of society and the importance of media education in the creation of a free, but positive and constructive, environment on the internet.

I. Introduction

Before the internet, few actors could afford to participate in public debate due to the barriers that limited access to its enabling infrastructure, such as television channels and radio frequencies. 1 Digital platforms tore down this gate by creating open online communities for user-generated content, published without editorial control and at no cost. This exponentially increased participation in public discourse and the amount of information available. 2 At the same time, it led to an increase in disinformation campaigns, hate speech, slander, lies, and conspiracy theories used to advance antidemocratic goals. Platforms’ attempts to moderate speech at scale while maximizing engagement and profits have led to an increasingly prominent role for content moderation algorithms that shape who can participate and be heard in online public discourse. These systems play an essential role in the exercise of freedom of expression and in democratic competence and participation in the 21st century.

In this context, this Essay is a critical reflection on the impacts of the digital revolution and of the internet on democracy and freedom of expression. Part I establishes historical and conceptual assumptions about constitutional democracy; it also discusses the role of digital platforms in the current moment of democratic recession. Part II discusses how social media platforms are revolutionizing interpersonal and social communication, and democratizing access to knowledge and information, but also lead to an exponential spread of mis- and disinformation, hate speech and conspiracy theories. Part III proposes a framework for the regulation of digital platforms that seeks to find the right balance with the countervailing fundamental right to freedom of expression. Part IV highlights the role of society and the importance of media education in the creation of a free, but positive and constructive, environment on the internet.

II. Democracy and Authoritarian Populism

Constitutional democracy emerged as the predominant ideology of the 20th century, rising above the alternative projects of communism, fascism, Nazism, military regimes, and religious fundamentalism . 3 Democratic constitutionalism centers around two major ideas that merged at the end of the 20th century: constitutionalism , heir of the liberal revolutions in England, America, and France, expressing the ideas of limited power, rule of law, and respect for fundamental rights; 4 and democracy , a regime of popular sovereignty, free and fair elections, and majority rule. 5 In most countries, democracy only truly consolidated throughout the 20th century through universal suffrage guaranteed with the end of restrictions on political participation based on wealth, education, sex, or race. 6

Contemporary democracies are made up of votes, rights, and reasons. They are not limited to fair procedural rules in the electoral process, but demand respect for substantive fundamental rights of all citizens and a permanent public debate that informs and legitimizes political decisions. 7 To ensure protection of these three aspects, most democratic regimes include in their constitutional framework a supreme court or constitutional court with jurisdiction to arbitrate the inevitable tensions that arise between democracy’s popular sovereignty and constitutionalism’s fundamental rights. 8 These courts are, ultimately, the institutions responsible for protecting fundamental rights and the rules of the democratic game against any abuse of power attempted by the majority. Recent experiences in Hungary, Poland, Turkey, Venezuela, and Nicaragua show that when courts fail to fulfill this role, democracy collapses or suffers major setbacks. 9

In recent years, several events have challenged the prevalence of democratic constitutionalism in many parts of the world, in a phenomenon characterized by many as democratic recession. 10 Even consolidated democracies have endured moments of turmoil and institutional discredit, 11 as the world witnessed the rise of an authoritarian, anti-pluralist, and anti-institutional populist wave posing serious threats to democracy.

Populism can be right-wing or left-wing, 12 but the recent wave has been characterized by the prevalence of right-wing extremism, often racist, xenophobic, misogynistic, and homophobic. 13 While in the past the far left was united through Communist International, today it is the far right that has a major global network. 14 The hallmark of right-wing populism is the division of society into “us” (the pure, decent, conservatives) and “them” (the corrupt, liberal, cosmopolitan elites). 15 Authoritarian populism flows from the unfulfilled promises of democracy for opportunities and prosperity for all. 16 Three aspects undergird this democratic frustration: political (people do not feel represented by the existing electoral systems, political leaders, and democratic institutions); social (stagnation, unemployment, and the rise of inequality); and cultural identity (a conservative reaction to the progressive identity agenda of human rights that prevailed in recent decades with the protection of the fundamental rights of women, African descendants, religious minorities, LGBTQ+ communities, indigenous populations, and the environment). 17

Extremist authoritarian populist regimes often adopt similar strategies to capitalize on the political, social, and cultural identity-based frustrations fueling democratic recessions. These tactics include by-pass or co-optation of the intermediary institutions that mediate the interface between the people and the government, such as the legislature, the press, and civil society. They also involve attacks on supreme courts and constitutional courts and attempts to capture them by appointing submissive judges. 18 The rise of social media potentializes these strategies by creating a free and instantaneous channel of direct communication between populists and their supporters. 19 This unmediated interaction facilitates the use of disinformation campaigns, hate speech, slander, lies, and conspiracy theories as political tools to advance antidemocratic goals. The instantaneous nature of these channels is ripe for impulsive reactions, which facilitate verbal attacks by supporters and polarization, feeding back into the populist discourse. These tactics threaten democracy and free and fair elections because they deceive voters and silence the opposition, distorting public debate. Ultimately, this form of communication undermines the values that justify the special protection of freedom of expression to begin with. The “truth decay” and “fact polarization” that result from these efforts discredit institutions and consequently foster distrust in democracy. 20

III. Internet, Social Media, and Freedom of Expression 21

The third industrial revolution, also known as the technological or digital revolution, has shaped our world today. 22 Some of its main features are the massification of personal computers, the universalization of smartphones and, most importantly, the internet. One of the main byproducts of the digital revolution and the internet was the emergence of social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok and messaging applications like WhatsApp and Telegram. We live in a world of apps, algorithms, artificial intelligence, and innovation occurring at breakneck speed where nothing seems truly new for very long. This is the background for the narrative that follows.

A. The Impact of the Internet

The internet revolutionized the world of interpersonal and social communication, exponentially expanded access to information and knowledge, and created a public sphere where anyone can express ideas, opinions, and disseminate facts. 23 Before the internet, one’s participation in public debate was dependent upon the professional press, 24 which investigated facts, abided by standards of journalistic ethics, 25 and was liable for damages if it knowingly or recklessly published untruthful information. 26 There was a baseline of editorial control and civil liability over the quality and veracity of what was published in this medium. This does not mean that it was a perfect world. The number of media outlets was, and continues to be, limited in quantity and perspectives; journalistic companies have their own interests, and not all of them distinguish fact from opinion with the necessary care. Still, there was some degree of control over what became public, and there were costs to the publication of overtly hateful or false speech.

The internet, with the emergence of websites, personal blogs, and social media, revolutionized this status quo. It created open, online communities for user-generated texts, images, videos, and links, published without editorial control and at no cost. This advanced participation in public discourse, diversified sources, and exponentially increased available information. 27 It gave a voice to minorities, civil society, politicians, public agents, and digital influencers, and it allowed demands for equality and democracy to acquire global dimensions. This represented a powerful contribution to political dynamism, resistance to authoritarianism, and stimulation of creativity, scientific knowledge, and commercial exchanges. 28 Increasingly, the most relevant political, social, and cultural communications take place on the internet’s unofficial channels.

However, the rise of social media also led to an increase in the dissemination of abusive and criminal speech. 29 While these platforms did not create mis- or disinformation, hate speech, or speech that attacks democracy, the ability to publish freely, with no editorial control and little to no accountability, increased the prevalence of these types of speech and facilitated its use as a political tool by populist leaders. 30 Additionally, and more fundamentally, platform business models compounded the problem through algorithms that moderate and distribute online content. 31

B. The Role of Algorithms

The ability to participate and be heard in online public discourse is currently defined by the content moderation algorithms of a couple major technology companies. Although digital platforms initially presented themselves as neutral media where users could publish freely, they in fact exercise legislative, executive, and judicial functions because they unilaterally define speech rules in their terms and conditions and their algorithms decide how content is distributed and how these rules are applied. 32

Specifically, digital platforms rely on algorithms for two different functions: recommending content and moderating content. 33 First, a fundamental aspect of the service they offer involves curating the content available to provide each user with a personalized experience and increase time spent online. They resort to deep learning algorithms that monitor every action on the platform, draw from user data, and predict what content will keep a specific user engaged and active based on their prior activity or that of similar users. 34 The transition from a world of information scarcity to a world of information abundance generated fierce competition for user attention—the most valuable resource in the Digital Age. 35 The power to modify a person’s information environment has a direct impact on their behavior and beliefs. Because AI systems can track an individual’s online history, they can tailor specific messages to maximize impact. More importantly, they monitor whether and how the user interacts with the tailored message, using this feedback to influence future content targeting and progressively becoming more effective in shaping behavior. 36 Given that humans engage more with content that is polarizing and provocative, these algorithms elicit powerful emotions, including anger. 37 The power to organize online content therefore directly impacts freedom of expression, pluralism, and democracy. 38

In addition to recommendation systems, platforms rely on algorithms for content moderation, the process of classifying content to determine whether it violates community standards. 39 As mentioned, the growth of social media and its use by people around the world allowed for the spread of lies and criminal acts with little cost and almost no accountability, threatening the stability of even long-standing democracies. Inevitably, digital platforms had to enforce terms and conditions defining the norms of their digital community and moderate speech accordingly. 40 But the potentially infinite amount of content published online means that this control cannot be exercised exclusively by humans.

Content moderation algorithms optimize the scanning of published content to identify violations of community standards or terms of service at scale and apply measures ranging from removal to reducing reach or including clarifications or references to alternative information. Platforms often rely on two algorithmic models for content moderation. The first is the reproduction detection model , which uses unique identifiers to catch reproductions of content previously labeled as undesired. 41 The second system, the predictive model , uses machine learning techniques to identify potential illegalities in new and unclassified content. 42 Machine learning is a subtype of artificial intelligence that extracts patterns in training datasets, capable of learning from data without explicit programming to do so. 43 Although helpful, both models have shortcomings.

The reproduction detection model is inefficient for content such as hate speech and disinformation, where the potential for new and different publications is virtually unlimited and users can deliberately make changes to avoid detection. 44 The predictive model is still limited in its ability to address situations to which it has not been exposed in training, primarily because it lacks the human ability to understand nuance and to factor in contextual considerations that influence the meaning of speech. 45 Additionally, machine learning algorithms rely on data collected from the real world and may embed prejudices or preconceptions, leading to asymmetrical applications of the filter. 46 And because the training data sets are so large, it can be hard to audit them for these biases. 47

Despite these limitations, algorithms will continue to be a crucial resource in content moderation given the scale of online activities. 48 In the last two months of 2020 alone, Facebook applied a content moderation measure to 105 million publications, and Instagram to 35 million. 49 YouTube has 500 hours of video uploaded per minute and removed more than 9.3 million videos. 50 In the first half of 2020, Twitter analyzed complaints related to 12.4 million accounts for potential violations of its rules and took action against 1.9 million. 51 This data supports the claim that human moderation is impossible, and that algorithms are a necessary tool to reduce the spread of illicit and harmful content. On the one hand, holding platforms accountable for occasional errors in these systems would create wrong incentives to abandon algorithms in content moderation with the negative consequence of significantly increasing the spread of undesired speech. 52 On the other hand, broad demands for platforms to implement algorithms to optimize content moderation, or laws that impose very short deadlines to respond to removal requests submitted by users, can create excessive pressure for the use of these imprecise systems on a larger scale. Acknowledging the limitations of this technology is fundamental for precise regulation.

C. Some Undesirable Consequences

One of the most striking impacts of this new informational environment is the exponential increase in the scale of social communications and the circulation of news. Around the world, few newspapers, print publications, and radio stations cross the threshold of having even one million subscribers and listeners. This suggests the majority of these publications have a much smaller audience, possibly in the thousands or tens of thousands of people. 53 Television reaches millions of viewers, although diluted among dozens or hundreds of channels. 54 Facebook, on the other hand, has about 3 billion active users. 55 YouTube has 2.5 billion accounts. 56 WhatsApp, more than 2 billion. 57 The numbers are bewildering. However, and as anticipated, just as the digital revolution democratized access to knowledge, information, and public space, it also introduced negative consequences for democracy that must be addressed. Three of them include:

a) the increased circulation of disinformation, deliberate lying, hate speech, conspiracy theories, attacks on democracy, and inauthentic behavior, made possible by recommendation algorithms that optimize for user engagement and content moderation algorithms that are still incapable of adequately identifying undesirable content;

b) the tribalization of life, with the formation of echo chambers where groups speak only to themselves, reinforcing confirmation bias, 58 making speech progressively more radical, and contributing to polarization and intolerance; and

c) a global crisis in the business model of the professional press. Although social media platforms have become one of the main sources of information, they do not produce their own content. They hire engineers, not reporters, and their interest is engagement, not news. 59 Because advertisers’ spending has migrated away from traditional news publications to technological platforms with broader reaches, the press has suffered from a lack of revenue which has forced hundreds of major publications, national and local, to close their doors or reduce their journalist workforce. 60 But a free and strong press is more than just a private business; it is a pillar for an open and free society. It serves a public interest in the dissemination of facts, news, opinions, and ideas, indispensable preconditions for the informed exercise of citizenship. Knowledge and truth—never absolute, but sincerely sought—are essential elements for the functioning of a constitutional democracy. Citizens need to share a minimum set of common objective facts from which to inform their own judgments. If they cannot accept the same facts, public debate becomes impossible. Intolerance and violence are byproducts of the inability to communicate—hence the importance of “knowledge institutions,” such as universities, research entities, and the institutional press. The value of free press for democracy is illustrated by the fact that in different parts of the world, the press is one of the only private businesses specifically referred to throughout constitutions. Despite its importance for society and democracy, surveys reveal a concerning decline in its prestige. 61

In the beginning of the digital revolution, there was a belief that the internet should be a free, open, and unregulated space in the interest of protecting access to the platform and promoting freedom of expression. Over time, concerns emerged, and a consensus gradually grew for the need for internet regulation. Multiple approaches for regulating the internet were proposed, including: (a) economic, through antitrust legislation, consumer protection, fair taxation, and copyright rules; (b) privacy, through laws restricting collection of user data without consent, especially for content targeting; and (c) targeting inauthentic behavior, content control, and platform liability rules. 62

Devising the proper balance between the indispensable preservation of freedom of expression on the one hand, and the repression of illegal content on social media on the other, is one of the most complex issues of our generation. Freedom of expression is a fundamental right incorporated into virtually all contemporary constitutions and, in many countries, is considered a preferential freedom. Several reasons have been advanced for granting freedom of expression special protection, including its roles: (a) in the search for the possible truth 63 in an open and plural society, 64 as explored above in discussing the importance of the institutional press; (b) as an essential element for democracy 65 because it allows the free circulation of ideas, information, and opinions that inform public opinion and voting; and (c) as an essential element of human dignity, 66 allowing the expression of an individual’s personality.

The regulation of digital platforms cannot undermine these values but must instead aim at its protection and strengthening. However, in the digital age, these same values that historically justified the reinforced protection of freedom of expression can now justify its regulation. As U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres thoughtfully stated, “the ability to cause large-scale disinformation and undermine scientifically established facts is an existential risk to humanity.” 67

Two aspects of the internet business model are particularly problematic for the protection of democracy and free expression. The first is that, although access to most technological platforms and applications is free, users pay for access with their privacy. 68 As Lawrence Lessig observed, we watch television, but the internet watches us. 69 Everything each individual does online is monitored and monetized. Data is the modern gold. 70 Thus, those who pay for the data can more efficiently disseminate their message through targeted ads. As previously mentioned, the power to modify a person’s information environment has a direct impact on behavior and beliefs, especially when messages are tailored to maximize impact on a specific individual. 71

The second aspect is that algorithms are programmed to maximize time spent online. This often leads to the amplification of provocative, radical, and aggressive content. This in turn compromises freedom of expression because, by targeting engagement, algorithms sacrifice the search for truth (with the wide circulation of fake news), democracy (with attacks on institutions and defense of coups and authoritarianism), and human dignity (with offenses, threats, racism, and others). The pursuit of attention and engagement for revenue is not always compatible with the values that underlie the protection of freedom of expression.

IV. A Framework for the Regulation of Social Media

Platform regulation models can be broadly classified into three categories: (a) state or government regulation, through legislation and rules drawing a compulsory, encompassing framework; (b) self-regulation, through rules drafted by platforms themselves and materialized in their terms of use; and (c) regulated self-regulation or coregulation, through standards fixed by the state but which grant platform flexibility in materializing and implementing them. This Essay argues for the third model, with a combination of governmental and private responsibilities. Compliance should be overseen by an independent committee, with the minority of its representatives coming from the government, and the majority coming from the business sector, academia, technology entities, users, and civil society.

The regulatory framework should aim to reduce the asymmetry of information between platforms and users, safeguard the fundamental right to freedom of expression from undue private or state interventions, and protect and strengthen democracy. The current technical limitations of content moderation algorithms explored above and normal substantive disagreement about what content should be considered illegal or harmful suggest that an ideal regulatory model should optimize the balance between the fundamental rights of users and platforms, recognizing that there will always be cases where consensus is unachievable. The focus of regulation should be the development of adequate procedures for content moderation, capable of minimizing errors and legitimizing decisions even when one disagrees with the substantive result. 72 With these premises as background, the proposal for regulation formulated here is divided into three levels: (a) the appropriate intermediary liability model for user-generated content; (b) procedural duties for content moderation; and (c) minimum duties to moderate content that represents concrete threats to democracy and/or freedom of expression itself.

A. Intermediary Liability for User-Generated Content

There are three main regimes for platform liability for third-party content. In strict liability models, platforms are held responsible for all user-generated posts. 73 Since platforms have limited editorial control over what is posted and limited human oversight over the millions of posts made daily, this would be a potentially destructive regime. In knowledge-based liability models, platform liability arises if they do not act to remove content after an extrajudicial request from users—this is also known as a “notice-and-takedown” system. 74 Finally, a third model would make platforms liable for user-generated content only in cases of noncompliance with a court order mandating content removal. This latter model was adopted in Brazil with the Civil Framework for the Internet (Marco Civil da Internet). 75 The only exception in Brazilian legislation to this general rule is revenge porn: if there is a violation of intimacy resulting from the nonconsensual disclosure of images, videos, or other materials containing private nudity or private sexual acts, extrajudicial notification is sufficient to create an obligation for content removal under penalty of liability. 76

In our view, the Brazilian model is the one that most adequately balances the fundamental rights involved. As mentioned, in the most complex cases concerning freedom of expression, people will disagree on the legality of speech. Rules holding platforms accountable for not removing content after mere user notification create incentives for over-removal of any potentially controversial content, excessively restricting users’ freedom of expression. If the state threatens to hold digital platforms accountable if it disagrees with their assessment, companies will have the incentive to remove all content that could potentially be considered illicit by courts to avoid liability. 77

Nonetheless, this liability regime should coexist with a broader regulatory structure imposing principles, limits, and duties on content moderation by digital platforms, both to increase the legitimacy of platforms’ application of their own terms and conditions and to minimize the potentially devastating impacts of illicit or harmful speech.

B. Standards for Proactive Content Moderation

Platforms have free enterprise and freedom of expression rights to set their own rules and decide the kind of environment they want to create, as well as to moderate harmful content that could drive users away. However, because these content moderation algorithms are the new governors of the public sphere, 78 and because they define the ability to participate and be heard in online public discourse, platforms should abide by minimum procedural duties of transparency and auditing, due process, and fairness.

1. Transparency and Auditing

Transparency and auditing measures serve mainly to ensure that platforms are accountable for content moderation decisions and for the impacts of their algorithms. They provide users with greater understanding and knowledge about the extent to which platforms regulate speech, and they provide oversight bodies and researchers with information to understand the threats of digital services and the role of platforms in amplifying or minimizing them.

Driven by demands from civil society, several digital platforms already publish transparency reports. 79 However, the lack of binding standards means that these reports have significant gaps, no independent verification of the information provided, 80 and no standardization across platforms, preventing comparative analysis. 81 In this context, regulatory initiatives that impose minimum requirements and standards are crucial to make oversight more effective. On the other hand, overly broad transparency mandates may force platforms to adopt simpler content moderation rules to reduce costs, which could negatively impact the accuracy of content moderation or the quality of the user experience. 82 A tiered approach to transparency, where certain information is public and certain information is limited to oversight bodies or previously qualified researchers, ensures adequate protection of countervailing interests, such as user privacy and business confidentiality. 83 The Digital Services Act, 84 recently passed in the European Union, contains robust transparency provisions that generally align with these considerations. 85

The information that should be publicly provided includes clear and unambiguous terms of use, the options available to address violations (such as removal, amplification reduction, clarifications, and account suspension) and the division of labor between algorithms and humans. More importantly, public transparency reports should include information on the accuracy of automated moderation measures and the number of content moderation actions broken down by type (such as removal, blocking, and account deletion). 86 There must also be transparency obligations to researchers, giving them access to crucial information and statistics, including to the content analyzed for the content moderation decisions. 87

Although valuable, transparency requirements are insufficient in promoting accountability because they rely on users and researchers to actively monitor platform conduct and presuppose that they have the power to draw attention to flaws and promote changes. 88 Legally mandated third-party algorithmic auditing is therefore an important complement to ensure that these models satisfy legal, ethical, and safety standards and to elucidate the embedded value tradeoffs, such as between user safety and freedom of expression. 89 As a starting point, algorithm audits should consider matters such as how accurately they perform, any potential bias or discrimination incorporated in the data, and to what extent the internal mechanics are explainable to humans. 90 The Digital Services Act contains a similar proposal. 91

The market for algorithmic auditing is still emergent and replete with uncertainty. In attempting to navigate this scenario, regulators should: (a) define how often the audits should happen; (b) develop standards and best practices for auditing procedures; (c) mandate specific disclosure obligations so auditors have access to the required data; and (d) define how identified harms should be addressed. 92

2. Due Process and Fairness

To ensure due process, platforms must inform users affected by content moderation decisions of the allegedly violated provision of the terms of use, as well as offer an internal system of appeals against these decisions. Platforms must also create systems that allow for the substantiated denunciation of content or accounts by other users, and notify reporting users of the decision taken.

As for fairness, platforms should ensure that the rules are applied equally to all users. Although it is reasonable to suppose that platforms may adopt different criteria for public persons or information of public interest, these exceptions must be clear in the terms of use. This issue has recently been the subject of controversy between the Facebook Oversight Board and the company. 93

Due to the enormous amount of content published on the platforms and the inevitability of using automated mechanisms for content moderation, platforms should not be held accountable for a violation of these duties in specific cases, but only when the analysis reveals a systemic failure to comply. 94

C. Minimum Duties to Moderate Illicit Content

The regulatory framework should also contain specific obligations to address certain types of especially harmful speech. The following categories are considered by the authors to fall within this group: disinformation, hate speech, anti-democratic attacks, cyberbullying, terrorism, and child pornography. Admittedly, defining and consensually identifying the speech included in these categories—except in the case of child pornography 95 —is a complex and largely subjective task. Precisely for this reason, platforms should be free to define how the concepts will be operationalized, as long as they guide definitions by international human rights parameters and in a transparent manner. This does not mean that all platforms will reach the same definitions nor the same substantive results in concrete cases, but this should not be considered a flaw in the system, since the plurality of rules promotes freedom of expression. The obligation to observe international human rights parameters reduces the discretion of companies, while allowing for the diversity of policies among them. After defining these categories, platforms must establish mechanisms that allow users to report violations.

In addition, platforms should develop mechanisms to address coordinated inauthentic behaviors, which involve the use of automated systems or deceitful means to artificially amplify false or dangerous messages by using bots, fake profiles, trolls, and provocateurs. 96 For example, if a person publishes a post for his twenty followers saying that kerosene oil is good for curing COVID-19, the negative impact of this misinformation is limited. However, if that message is amplified to thousands of users, a greater public health issue arises. Or, in another example, if the false message that an election was rigged reaches millions of people, there is a democratic risk due to the loss of institutional credibility.

The role of oversight bodies should be to verify that platforms have adopted terms of use that prohibit the sharing of these categories of speech and ensure that, systemically, the recommendation and content moderation systems are trained to moderate this content.

V. Conclusion

The World Wide Web has provided billions of people with access to knowledge, information, and the public space, changing the course of history. However, the misuse of the internet and social media poses serious threats to democracy and fundamental rights. Some degree of regulation has become necessary to confront inauthentic behavior and illegitimate content. It is essential, however, to act with transparency, proportionality, and adequate procedures, so that pluralism, diversity, and freedom of expression are preserved.

In addition to the importance of regulatory action, the responsibility for the preservation of the internet as a healthy public sphere also lies with citizens. Media education and user awareness are fundamental steps for the creation of a free but positive and constructive environment on the internet. Citizens should be conscious that social media can be unfair, perverse, and can violate fundamental rights and basic rules of democracy. They must be attentive not to uncritically pass on all information received. Alongside states, regulators, and tech companies, citizens are also an important force to address these threats. In Jonathan Haidt’s words, “[w]hen our public square is governed by mob dynamics unrestrained by due process, we don’t get justice and inclusion; we get a society that ignores context, proportionality, mercy, and truth.” 97

• 1 Tim Wu, Is the First Amendment Obsolete? , in The Perilous Public Square 15 (David E. Pozen ed., 2020).
• 2 Jack M. Balkin, Free Speech is a Triangle , 118 Colum. L. Rev. 2011, 2019 (2018).
• 3 Luís Roberto Barroso, O Constitucionalismo Democrático ou Neoconstitucionalismo como ideologia vitoriosa do século XX , 4 Revista Publicum 14, 14 (2018).
• 4 Id. at 16.
• 7 Ronald Dworkin, Is Democracy Possible Here?: Principles for a New Political Debate xii (2006); Ronald Dworkin, Taking Rights Seriously 181 (1977).
• 8 Barroso, supra note 3, at 16.
• 9 Samuel Issacharoff, Fragile Democracies: Contested Power in the Era of Constitutional Courts i (2015).
• 10 Larry Diamond, Facing up to the Democratic Recession , 26 J. Democracy 141 (2015). Other scholars have referred to the same phenomenon using other terms, such as democratic retrogression, abusive constitutionalism, competitive authoritarianism, illiberal democracy, and autocratic legalism. See, e.g. , Aziz Huq & Tom Ginsburg, How to Lose a Constitutional Democracy , 65 UCLA L. Rev. 91 (2018); David Landau, Abusive Constitutionalism , 47 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 189 (2013); Kim Lane Scheppele, Autocratic Legalism , 85 U. Chi. L. Rev. 545 (2018).
• 11 Dan Balz, A Year After Jan. 6, Are the Guardrails that Protect Democracy Real or Illusory? , Wash. Post (Jan. 6, 2022), https://perma.cc/633Z-A9AJ; Brexit: Reaction from Around the UK , BBC News (June 24, 2016), https://perma.cc/JHM3-WD7A.
• 12 Cas Mudde, The Populist Zeitgeist , 39 Gov’t & Opposition 541, 549 (2004).
• 13 See generally Mohammed Sinan Siyech, An Introduction to Right-Wing Extremism in India , 33 New Eng. J. Pub. Pol’y 1 (2021) (discussing right-wing extremism in India). See also Eviane Leidig, Hindutva as a Variant of Right-Wing Extremism , 54 Patterns of Prejudice 215 (2020) (tracing the history of “Hindutva”—defined as “an ideology that encompasses a wide range of forms, from violent, paramilitary fringe groups, to organizations that advocate the restoration of Hindu ‘culture’, to mainstream political parties”—and finding that it has become mainstream since 2014 under Modi); Ariel Goldstein, Brazil Leads the Third Wave of the Latin American Far Right , Ctr. for Rsch. on Extremism (Mar. 1, 2021), https://perma.cc/4PCT-NLQJ (discussing right-wing extremism in Brazil under Bolsonaro); Seth G. Jones, The Rise of Far-Right Extremism in the United States , Ctr. for Strategic & Int’l Stud. (Nov. 2018), https://perma.cc/983S-JUA7 (discussing right-wing extremism in the U.S. under Trump).
• 14 Sergio Fausto, O Desafio Democrático [The Democratic Challenge], Piauí (Aug. 2022), https://perma.cc/474A-3849.
• 15 Jan-Werner Muller, Populism and Constitutionalism , in The Oxford Handbook of Populism 590 (Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser et al. eds., 2017).
• 16 Ming-Sung Kuo, Against Instantaneous Democracy , 17 Int’l J. Const. L. 554, 558–59 (2019); see also Digital Populism , Eur. Ctr. for Populism Stud., https://perma.cc/D7EV-48MV.
• 17 Luís Roberto Barroso, Technological Revolution, Democratic Recession and Climate Change: The Limits of Law in a Changing World , 18 Int’l J. Const. L. 334, 349 (2020).
• 18 For the use of social media, see Sven Engesser et al., Populism and Social Media: How Politicians Spread a Fragmented Ideology , 20 Info. Commc’n & Soc’y 1109 (2017). For attacks on the press, see WPFD 2021: Attacks on Press Freedom Growing Bolder Amid Rising Authoritarianism , Int’l Press Inst. (Apr. 30, 2021), https://perma.cc/SGN9-55A8. For attacks on the judiciary, see Michael Dichio & Igor Logvinenko, Authoritarian Populism, Courts and Democratic Erosion , Just Sec. (Feb. 11, 2021), https://perma.cc/WZ6J-YG49.
• 19 Kuo, supra note 16, at 558–59; see also Digital Populism , supra note 16.
• 20 Vicki C. Jackson, Knowledge Institutions in Constitutional Democracy: Reflections on “the Press” , 15 J. Media L. 275 (2022).
• 21 Many of the ideas and information on this topic were collected in Luna van Brussel Barroso, Liberdade de Expressão e Democracia na Era Digital: O impacto das mídias sociais no mundo contemporâneo [Freedom of Expression and Democracy in the Digital Era: The Impact of Social Media in the Contemporary World] (2022), which was recently published in Brazil.
• 22 The first industrial revolution is marked by the use of steam as a source of energy in the middle of the 18th century. The second started with the use of electricity and the invention of the internal combustion engine at the turn of the 19th to the 20th century. There are already talks of the fourth industrial revolution as a product of the fusion of technologies that blurs the boundaries among the physical, digital, and biological spheres. See generally Klaus Schwab, The Fourth Industrial Revolution (2017).
• 23 Gregory P. Magarian, The Internet and Social Media , in The Oxford Handbook of Freedom of Speech 350, 351–52 (Adrienne Stone & Frederick Schauer eds., 2021).
• 24 Wu, supra note 1, at 15.
• 25 Journalistic ethics include distinguishing fact from opinion, verifying the veracity of what is published, having no self-interest in the matter being reported, listening to the other side, and rectifying mistakes. For an example of an international journalistic ethics charter, see Global Charter of Ethics for Journalists , Int’l Fed’n of Journalists (June 12, 2019), https://perma.cc/7A2C-JD2S.
• 26 See, e.g. , New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964).
• 27 Balkin, supra note 2, at 2018.
• 28 Magarian, supra note 23, at 351–52.
• 29 Wu, supra note 1, at 15.
• 30 Magarian, supra note 23, at 357–60.
• 31 Niva Elkin-Koren & Maayan Perel, Speech Contestation by Design: Democratizing Speech Governance by AI , 50 Fla. State U. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2023).
• 32 Thomas E. Kadri & Kate Klonick, Facebook v. Sullivan: Public Figures and Newsworthiness in Online Speech , 93 S. Cal. L. Rev. 37, 94 (2019).
• 33 Elkin-Koren & Perel, supra note 31.
• 34 Chris Meserole, How Do Recommender Systems Work on Digital Platforms? , Brookings Inst.(Sept. 21, 2022), https://perma.cc/H53K-SENM.
• 35 Kris Shaffer, Data versus Democracy: How Big Data Algorithms Shape Opinions and Alter the Course of History xi–xv (2019).
• 36 See generally Stuart Russell, Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control (2019).
• 37 Shaffer, supra note 35, at xi–xv.
• 38 More recently, with the advance of neuroscience, platforms have sharpened their ability to manipulate and change our emotions, feelings and, consequently, our behavior in accordance not with our own interests, but with theirs (or of those who they sell this service to). Kaveh Waddell, Advertisers Want to Mine Your Brain , Axios (June 4, 2019), https://perma.cc/EU85-85WX. In this context, there is already talk of a new fundamental right to cognitive liberty, mental self-determination, or the right to free will. Id .
• 39 Content moderation refers to “systems that classify user generated content based on either matching or prediction, leading to a decision and governance outcome (e.g. removal, geoblocking, account takedown).” Robert Gorwa, Reuben Binns & Christian Katzenbach, Algorithmic Content Moderation: Technical and Political Challenges in the Automation of Platform Governance , 7 Big Data & Soc’y 1, 3 (2020).
• 40 Jack M. Balkin, Free Speech in the Algorithmic Society: Big Data, Private Governance, and New School Speech Regulation , 51 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1149, 1183 (2018).
• 41 See Carey Shenkman, Dhanaraj Thakur & Emma Llansó, Do You See What I See? Capabilities and Limits of Automated Multimedia Content Analysis 13–16 (May 2021),https://perma.cc/J9MP-7PQ8.
• 42 See id. at 17–21.
• 43 See Michael Wooldridge, A Brief History of Artificial Intelligence: What It Is, Where We Are, and Where We Are Going 63 (2021).

Perceptual hashing has been the primary technology utilized to mitigate the spread of CSAM, since the same materials are often repeatedly shared, and databases of offending content are maintained by institutions like the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) and its international analogue, the International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children (ICMEC).

• 45 Natural language understanding is undermined by language ambiguity, contextual dependence of words of non-immediate proximity, references, metaphors, and general semantics rules. See Erik J. Larson, The Myth of Artificial Intelligence: Why Computers Can’t Think the Way We Do 52–55 (2021). Language comprehension in fact requires unlimited common-sense knowledge about the actual world, which humans possess and is impossible to code. Id . A case decided by Facebook’s Oversight Board illustrates the point: the company’s predictive filter for combatting pornography removed images from a breast cancer awareness campaign, a clearly legitimate content not meant to be targeted by the algorithm. See Breast Cancer Symptoms and Nudity , Oversight Bd. (2020), https://perma.cc/U9A5-TTTJ. However, based on prior training, the algorithm removed the publication because it detected pornography and was unable to factor the contextual consideration that this was a legitimate health campaign. Id .
• 46 See generally Adriano Koshiyama, Emre Kazim & Philip Treleaven, Algorithm Auditing: Managing the Legal, Ethical, and Technological Risks of Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and Associated Algorithms , 55 Computer 40 (2022).
• 47 Elkin-Koren & Perel, supra note 31.
• 48 Evelyn Douek, Governing Online Speech: From “Posts-as-Trumps” to Proportionality and Probability , 121 Colum. L. Rev. 759, 791 (2021).
• 53 See Martha Minow, Saving the Press: Why the Constitution Calls for Government Action to Preserve Freedom of Speech 20 (2021). For example, the best-selling newspaper in the world, The New York Times , ended the year 2022 with around 10 million subscribers across digital and print. Katie Robertson, The New York Times Company Adds 180,000 Digital Subscribers , N.Y. Times (Nov. 2, 2022), https://perma.cc/93PF-TKC5. The Economist magazine had approximately 1.2 million subscribers in 2022. The Economist Group, Annual Report 2022 24 (2022), https://perma.cc/9HQQ-F7W2. Around the world, publications that reach one million subscribers are rare. These Are the Most Popular Paid Subscription News Websites , World Econ. F. (Apr. 29, 2021), https://perma.cc/L2MK-VPNX.
• 54 Lawrence Lessig, They Don’t Represent Us: Reclaiming Our Democracy 105 (2019).
• 55 Essential Facebook Statistics and Trends for 2023 , Datareportal (Feb. 19, 2023), https://perma.cc/UH33-JHUQ.
• 56 YouTube User Statistics 2023 , Glob. Media Insight (Feb. 27, 2023), https://perma.cc/3H4Y-H83V.
• 57 Brian Dean, WhatsApp 2022 User Statistics: How Many People Use WhatsApp , Backlinko (Jan. 5, 2022), https://perma.cc/S8JX-S7HN.
• 58 Confirmation bias, the tendency to seek out and favor information that reinforces one’s existing beliefs, presents an obstacle to critical thinking. Sachin Modgil et al., A Confirmation Bias View on Social Media Induced Polarisation During COVID-19 , Info. Sys. Frontiers (Nov. 20, 2021).
• 59 Minow, supra note 53, at 2.
• 60 Id. at 3, 11.
• 61 On the importance of the role of the press as an institution of public interest and its “crucial relationship” with democracy, see id. at 35. On the press as a “knowledge institution,” the idea of “institutional press,” and data on the loss of prestige by newspapers and television stations, see Jackson, supra note 20, at 4–5.
• 62 See , e.g. , Jack M. Balkin, How to Regulate (and Not Regulate) Social Media , 1 J. Free Speech L. 71, 89–96 (2021).
• 63 By possible truth we mean that not all claims, opinions and beliefs can be ascertained as true or false. Objective truths are factual and can thus be proven even when controversial—for example, climate change and the effectiveness of vaccines. Subjective truths, on the other hand, derive from individual normative, religious, philosophical, and political views. In a pluralistic world, any conception of freedom of expression must protect individual subjective beliefs.
• 64 Eugene Volokh, In Defense of the Marketplace of Ideas/Search for Truth as a Theory of Free Speech Protection , 97 Va. L. Rev. 595, 595 (May 2011).
• 66 Steven J. Heyman, Free Speech and Human Dignity 2 (2008).
• 67 A Global Dialogue to Guide Regulation Worldwide , UNESCO (Feb. 23, 2023), https://perma.cc/ALK8-HTG3.
• 68 Can We Fix What’s Wrong with Social Media? , Yale L. Sch. News (Aug. 3, 2022), https://perma.cc/MN58-2EVK.
• 69 Lessig, supra note 54, at 105.
• 71 See supra Part III.B.
• 72 Doeuk, supra note 48, at 804–13; see also John Bowers & Jonathan Zittrain, Answering Impossible Questions: Content Governance in an Age of Disinformation , Harv. Kennedy Sch. Misinformation Rev. (Jan. 14, 2020), https://perma.cc/R7WW-8MQX.
• 73 Daphne Keller, Systemic Duties of Care and Intermediary Liability , Ctr. for Internet & Soc’y Blog (May 28, 2020), https://perma.cc/25GU-URGT.
• 75 Decreto No. 12.965, de 23 de abril de 2014, Diário Oficial da União [D.O.U.] de 4.14.2014 (Braz.) art. 19. In order to ensure freedom of expression and prevent censorship, providers of internet applications can only be civilly liable for damages resulting from content generated by third parties if, after specific court order, they do not make arrangements to, in the scope and technical limits of their service and within the indicated time, make unavailable the content identified as infringing, otherwise subject to the applicable legal provisions. Id .
• 76 Id. art. 21. The internet application provider that provides content generated by third parties will be held liable for the violation of intimacy resulting from the disclosure, without authorization of its participants, of images, videos, or other materials containing nude scenes or private sexual acts when, upon receipt of notification by the participant or its legal representative, fail to diligently promote, within the scope and technical limits of its service, the unavailability of this content. Id .
• 77 Balkin, supra note 2, at 2017.
• 78 Kate Klonick, The New Governors: The People, Rules, and Processes Governing Online Speech , 131 Harv. L. Rev. 1598, 1603 (2018).
• 79 Transparency Reporting Index, Access Now (July 2021), https://perma.cc/2TSL-2KLD (cataloguing transparency reporting from companies around the world).
• 80 Hum. Rts. Comm., Rep. of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, ¶¶ 63–66, U.N. Doc A/HRC/32/35 (2016).
• 81 Paddy Leerssen, The Soap Box as a Black Box: Regulating Transparency in Social Media Recommender Systems , 11 Eur. J. L. & Tech. (2020).
• 82 Daphne Keller, Some Humility About Transparency , Ctr. for Internet & Soc’y Blog (Mar. 19, 2021), https://perma.cc/4Y85-BATA.
• 83 Mark MacCarthy, Transparency Requirements for Digital Social Media Platforms: Recommendations for Policy Makers and Industry , Transatlantic Working Grp. (Feb. 12, 2020).
• 84 2022 O.J. (L 277) 1 [hereinafter DSA].
• 85 The DSA was approved by the European Parliament on July 5, 2022, and on October 4, 2022, the European Council gave its final acquiescence to the regulation. Digital Services: Landmark Rules Adopted for a Safer, Open Online Environment , Eur. Parliament (July 5, 2022), https://perma.cc/BZP5-V2B2. The DSA increases transparency and accountability of platforms, by providing, for example, for the obligation of “clear information on content moderation or the use of algorithms for recommending content (so-called recommender systems); users will be able to challenge content moderation decisions.” Id .
• 86 MacCarthy, supra note 83, 19–24.
• 87 To this end, American legislators recently introduced a U.S. Congressional bill that proposes a model for conducting research on the impacts of digital communications in a way that protects user privacy. See Platform Accountability and Transparency Act, S. 5339, 117th Congress (2022). The project mandates that digital platforms share data with researchers previously authorized by the Federal Trade Commission and publicly disclose certain data about content, algorithms, and advertising. Id .
• 88 Yifat Nahmias & Maayan Perel, The Oversight of Content Moderation by AI: Impact Assessment and Their Limitations , 58 Harv. J. on Legis. 145, 154–57 (2021).
• 89 Auditing Algorithms: The Existing Landscape, Role of Regulator and Future Outlook , Digit. Regul. Coop. F. (Sept. 23, 2022), https://perma.cc/7N6W-JNCW.
• 90 See generally Koshiyama et al., supra note 46.
• 91 In Article 37, the DSA provides that digital platforms of a certain size should be accountable, through annual independent auditing, for compliance with the obligations set forth in the Regulation and with any commitment undertaken pursuant to codes of conduct and crisis protocols.
• 92 Digit. Regul. Coop. F., supra note 89.
• 93 In a transparency report published at the end of its first year of operation, the Oversight Board highlighted the inadequacy of the explanations presented by Meta on the operation of a system known as cross-check, which apparently gave some users greater freedom on the platform. In January 2022, Meta explained that the cross-check system grants an additional degree of review to certain content that internal systems mark as violating the platform’s terms of use. Meta submitted a query to the Board on how to improve the functioning of this system and the Board made relevant recommendations. See Oversight Board Published Policy Advisory Opinion on Meta’s Cross-Check Program , Oversight Bd. (Dec. 2022), https://perma.cc/87Z5-L759.
• 94 Evelyn Douek, Content Moderation as Systems Thinking , 136 Harv. L. Rev. 526, 602–03 (2022).
• 95 The illicit nature of child pornography is objectively apprehended and does not implicate the same subjective considerations that the other referenced categories entail. Not surprisingly, several databases have been created to facilitate the moderation of this content. See Ofcom, Overview of Perceptual Hashing Technology 14 (Nov. 22, 2022), https://perma.cc/EJ45-B76X (“Several hash databases to support the detection of known CSAM exist, e.g. the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) hash database, the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) hash list and the International Child Sexual Exploitation (ICSE) hash database.”).
• 97 Jonathan Haidt, Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid , Atlantic (Apr. 11, 2022), https://perma.cc/2NXD-32VM.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

ROLE OF MEDIA IN A DEMOCRACY

Related Papers

The role of the Media in a Democracy

Jeffrey Motlhamme

The role of the media in democracy differs from context to context. In this sense, the role of the media in a democracy depends on the type of democracy within which that media operates. The most important role of the media in a democracy is not only to protect the views and interests of the public; it is also to prevent tyranny of the majority within that same public in a democratic state. It has to be considered that even in a democratic state, there is a multiplicity of conflicting identities, views and interests. Thus, any form of media that seeks to play a role in democracy has to approach their role with an understanding of these issues. In essence, in playing their role, the media has to come to the realization that there are contestations.

International Journal of Applied Research in Social Sciences

ibrahim ukka

The media is the fourth pillar of democracy after the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. Media as control over the three pillars and underpin their performance with checks and balances. to be able to perform its role should be upheld the freedom of the press in conveying public information in an honest and balanced manner. besides that also to uphold this fourth pillar, the media must also be free from capitalism and politics. Media that does not merely support the interests of the owners of capital and perpetuates political power without considering the interests of the larger society. the possibility of freedom of the press institution that is captured by the interests of capitalism and politics, encourages the spirit of citizen journalism. the term citizen journalism to explain the processing and presentation of news by citizens rather than professional journalists. journalism activities undertaken by citizens as a manifestation of aspirations and the delivery of popul...

Anshul Jain

Afshin Ismaeli

This thesis examines the professional notion and attitudes of journalists in Kurdistan region, highlighting improvements in media performances in addition to indicating to the role of journalists in developing democracies and specific conflicts of journalists with societal norms, political and economic interests. Iraqi Kurdistan is an example of democratic transition in the middle of conflict hot zone. The study is based on qualitative interviews with journalists and managers of Rudaw media network.

Aysegul Kars Kaynar

Alexx C H U M B A Gibbs

Camelia Pavel

Based on reviews of communication literature, the present paper intends to analyze the functions of mass media from the theoretical points of view. It is established through the findings that mass media plays a significant role in modern society. They bring about a general diffusion of knowledge about life in the world today, thus influencing many aspects of our social, political and economic patterns. Mass media has certain important functions to perform which include influencing public opinion, determining the political agenda, providing a link between the government and the people, acting as a government watchdog, and affecting socialization, entertainment, educating the masses, and mobilization as well.

Abida Ashraf

Emmanuel R Marabuka

Gizem Sadak

Democracy, which consists of the combination of demos meaning "people" in the Greek language and kratos meaning "administration", means management of the people. However, a model in which the public directly shapes the management process is not available at any time in modern history. Therefore, it's more realistic to express democracy as a management model in which the real representatives of the people have the power to make decisions. Cincotta (2013), also explains Democracy as, "Democracy…is defined, basically, as government in which the supreme power is vested in the people. In some forms, democracy can be exercised directly by the people; in large societies, it's by the people through their elected agents, Or, in the memorable phrase of President Abraham Lincoln, democracy is government of the people, by the people, and for the people" (p.1). One of the factors that strengthens democracy is the media. As Ababa (2019) indicates, free, objective and competent media-plays a vital role in democracy. Media delivers information that allows voters to make informed choices within and outside the voting booth as well as can also contribute to the political process by encouraging politicians to respond to the citizens and to work on subjects of actual public interest. (p.9) In the light of Ababa's arguments, we could say that media is the tool that bridges between people and the government along with contributes to the democratic conduct of the state. There is a strong dependency between the media and democracy. The media institution is supposed to function as an informing authority and must mediate between government and citizens, among the politicians, also enables the communication between the citizens. Moreover, to give a place for freedom of expression. Lastly, to be the fourth arm of the

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences

Gönül Cengiz

Sociology and Anthropology

Ayysha Abbasi

swaleha badat

Dr. Ghulam Safdar , GHULAM S SHABIR

… the International Association for Media …

Oladipupo Iluyemi

Gazi Md. Muidul Haque

US-China Law Review

Aneta Stojanovska-Stefanova

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Home — Essay Samples — Government & Politics — Democracy — Role of media in a democracy

Role of Media in a Democracy

• Categories: Democracy Media

About this sample

Words: 686 |

Published: Mar 14, 2019

Words: 686 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Table of contents

Majority rules system implies, effect of media, works cited.

• Freedom House. (2021). Freedom and the Media. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-media/freedom-media-2021
• McQuail, D. (2013). McQuail's Mass Communication Theory (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Norris, P. (2000). A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies. Cambridge University Press.
• Curran, J., & Seaton, J. (2010). Power Without Responsibility: Press, Broadcasting, and the Internet in Britain (7th ed.). Routledge.
• Chadwick, A. (2017). The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power. Oxford University Press.
• Lichtenberg, J. (2017). Democracy and the Mass Media: A Collection of Essays. Routledge.
• Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge University Press.
• Esser, F., & Strömbäck, J. (2014). Mediatization of Politics: Understanding the Transformation of Western Democracies. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Papathanassopoulos, S. (2020). Media and Politics in Democracies: A Comparative Perspective. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication.
• Tumber, H., & Waisbord, S. (2017). The Routledge Companion to Media and Human Rights. Routledge.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Government & Politics Business

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 594 words

4 pages / 1790 words

1 pages / 643 words

2 pages / 1081 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Voter suppression is a contentious issue that strikes at the heart of democratic principles and the right to fair representation. In recent years, concerns about voter suppression tactics have intensified, sparking debates on [...]

Pluralism and majoritarianism are two contrasting models of democratic governance that have been the subject of much debate and discussion in the field of political science. While both systems aim to represent the will of the [...]

While democratic political systems offer numerous advantages, it is crucial to acknowledge and address their drawbacks for the sake of continuous improvement. The tyranny of the majority, political polarization and gridlock, the [...]

Propaganda plays a powerful role in manipulating public opinion and influencing societal attitudes towards certain ideologies or agendas. Throughout history, propaganda has been used as a tool for shaping public perception and [...]

The concept of Democracy and Non-Democracy began with the advent of the State. The clear distinction between the two concepts became clear when democracy came into practice in 508 BC. The first form of democracy, what is known [...]

According to Max Weber (1968), legitimacy is power in which its acquisition and exercise conforms to established law, power which interprets legal rules and is rational. As such it emphasizes rule of law, constitutionalism and [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

IAS EXAM PORTAL

• Study Notes
• Current Affairs
• Getting Started

NEW!   The Gist (MAY-24)  | E-BOOKS  |

HOT!   UPSC 2024-2025 COMPLETE STUDY NOTES  

(Essay) An Essay: Role of media in a democracy

An essay: role of media in a democracy, introduction.

Democracy means "A system of government in which all the people of a country can vote to elect their representatives". Media came into existence in 1780 with the introduction of a newspaper namely The Bengal Gazette and since then it has matured leaps and bounds. It has been playing a very important role in shaping human minds.

Role of media

Media plays a crucial role in shaping a healthy democracy. It is the backbone of a democracy. Media makes us aware of various social, political and economical activities happening around the world. It is like a mirror, which shows us or strives to show us the bare truth and harsh realities of life. The media has undoubtedly evolved and become more active over the years. It is the media only who reminds politicians about their unfulfilled promises at the time of elections. T.V news channels' excessive coverage during elections helps people, especially illiterates, in electing the right person to the power. This reminder compels politicians to be upto their promises in order to remain in power. Television and radio have made a significant achievement in educating rural illiterate masses in making them aware of all the events in their language. Coverage of exploitative malpractices of village heads and moneylenders has helped in taking stringent actions against them by attracting government's attention. The media also exposes loopholes in the democratic system, which ultimately helps government in filling the vacuums of loopholes and making a system more accountable, responsive and citizen-friendly. A democracy without media is like a vehicle without wheels. In the age of information technology we are bombarded with information. We get the pulse of the world events with just a click of a mouse. The flow of information has increased manifolds. The perfect blend of technology and human resources (journalist) has not left a single stone unturned in unearthing rampant corruption in politics and society. We all are well aware of what tehelka did. Thanks to technology that has brought a kind of revolution in journalism.

Impact of media

The impact of media is really noteworthy. Excessive coverage or hype of sensitive news has led to communal riots at times. The illiterates are more prone to provocations than the literates. Constant repetition of the news, especially sensational news, breeds apathy and insensitivity. For instance, In Dhananjoy Chatterjee case, the overloaded hype led to death of quite a few children who imitated the hanging procedure which was repeatedly shown in most of the T.V. news channels. There is a plethora of such negative impacts. Media should take utmost care in airing or publishing such sensational news. Commercialization has created a stiff competition in media. In order to outdo each other print media has often gone one step further in publishing articles, cover stories, etc. on sex. Media experts say this is one of the means of attracting readers who are glued to T.V. news channels, which have cropped up swiftly in a recent past and they believe this is a cheap form of journalism.

No one is perfect in this world and so is the media. Here I am not degrading the media, rather I would say there is still a lot of scope for improvement by which media can raise upto the aspirations of the people for which it is meant. I cannot think of a democracy without active and neutral media. Media is like a watchdog in a democracy that keeps government active. From being just an informer it has become an integral part of our daily lives. With the passage of time it has become a more matured and a more responsible entity. The present media revolution has helped people in making an informed decisions and this has led to beginning of a new era in a democracy.

Courtesy : ias aspirant 

• Iasguru's blog

NEW!   UPSC IAS COMPLETE NOTES

NEW!   UPSC MAINS G.S. 12 Years Solved Papers

NEW! UPSC Exam Complete Study Notes (PDF Available)

• ALERT: UPSC IAS, IPS, IFS 2024-2025 Exam...
• Download UPSC IAS PRELIM (GS+CSAT) Question...
• (Download) UPSC Toppers Study Notes PDF
• UPSC Exam Complete Study Notes 2024-2025-...
• (Download) UPSC, IAS MAINS Exam Previous...
• Getting Started for UPSC, IAS Exam - FAQ for...
• UPSC Civil Services PRELIM Exam 2024, 2025...
• UPSC आईएएस प्रारंभिक परीक्षा पिछले वर्ष के...
• Download E-Books PDF for UPSC IAS Exams
• (Date Sheet) UPSC IAS EXAM Calendar 2024
• New! THE HINDU, YOJANA, PIB PDF
• New! UPSC PRELIM Papers 2004-2023
• IAS परीक्षा पेपर in Hindi 2004-2023
• UPSC Syllabus PDF Download
• New! IAS MAINS Papers 2010-2023
• PDF Study Notes for UPSC (Hot!)
• E-books PDF Download  
• NCERT Books Download  | NCERT Hindi PDF
• New! UPSC MAINS SOLVED PAPERS PDF
• OLD NCERT PDF  
• UPSC 2024 Exam Calendar

UPSC 2024-25  |  Papers  |  Study Notes  | Coaching  | E-Books

UPSC Hindi  |  यूपीइससी 2024   |  पेपर्स  |  IAS HINDI NOTES  

Disclaimer: IAS EXAM PORTAL (UPSC PORTAL) is not associated with Union Public Service Commission, For UPSC official website visit - www.upsc.gov.in

About Us | Contact Us | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy

© 2006-2024 IAS EXAM PORTAL - India's Largest Online Community for IAS, Civil Services Aspirants.

• Classroom Programme
• Interview Guidance
• Online Programme
• Drishti Store
• My Bookmarks
• My Progress
• Change Password
• From The Editor's Desk
• How To Use The New Website
• Help Centre

Achievers Corner

• Topper's Interview
• About Civil Services
• UPSC Prelims Syllabus
• GS Prelims Strategy
• Prelims Analysis
• GS Paper-I (Year Wise)
• GS Paper-I (Subject Wise)
• CSAT Strategy
• Previous Years Papers
• Practice Quiz
• Weekly Revision MCQs
• 60 Steps To Prelims
• Prelims Refresher Programme 2020

Mains & Interview

• Mains GS Syllabus
• Mains GS Strategy
• Mains Answer Writing Practice
• Essay Strategy
• Fodder For Essay
• Model Essays
• Drishti Essay Competition
• Ethics Strategy
• Ethics Case Studies
• Ethics Discussion
• Ethics Previous Years Q&As
• Papers By Years
• Papers By Subject
• Be MAINS Ready
• Awake Mains Examination 2020
• Interview Strategy
• Interview Guidance Programme

Current Affairs

• Daily News & Editorial
• Daily CA MCQs
• Sansad TV Discussions
• Monthly CA Consolidation
• Monthly Editorial Consolidation
• Monthly MCQ Consolidation

Drishti Specials

• To The Point
• Important Institutions
• Learning Through Maps
• PRS Capsule
• Summary Of Reports
• Gist Of Economic Survey

Study Material

• NCERT Books
• NIOS Study Material
• IGNOU Study Material
• Yojana & Kurukshetra
• Chhatisgarh
• Uttar Pradesh
• Madhya Pradesh

Test Series

• UPSC Prelims Test Series
• UPSC Mains Test Series
• UPPCS Prelims Test Series
• UPPCS Mains Test Series
• BPSC Prelims Test Series
• RAS/RTS Prelims Test Series
• Daily Editorial Analysis
• YouTube PDF Downloads
• Strategy By Toppers
• Ethics - Definition & Concepts
• Mastering Mains Answer Writing
• Places in News
• UPSC Mock Interview
• PCS Mock Interview
• Interview Insights
• Prelims 2019
• Product Promos

Make Your Note

Biased Media is a Real Threat to Indian Democracy

• 29 Mar 2024
• 10 min read

Whoever controls the media, controls the mind

― Jim Morrison

Media plays a crucial role in any democratic society by providing information, shaping public opinion, and holding those in power accountable. However, the rise of biased media poses a significant threat to the democratic fabric of India. In recent years, Indian media has come under scrutiny for its biased reporting, sensationalism, and lack of objectivity. 

Media serves as the fourth pillar of democracy, alongside the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches. Its primary function is to inform citizens, facilitate debate, and act as a watchdog over the government and other powerful institutions. In India, a diverse and vibrant media landscape has emerged since independence, comprising print, broadcast, and digital platforms. However, the proliferation of biased media outlets has blurred the lines between news and propaganda, posing a grave danger to democracy.

Biased media outlets in India often prioritize sensationalism over substance, resorting to inflammatory rhetoric and divisive narratives to attract viewership or readership. This sensationalism contributes to the spread of misinformation and the polarization of society along religious, ethnic, and political lines. Moreover, biased reporting can sway public opinion, influence electoral outcomes, and undermine the credibility of democratic institutions.

The phenomenon of biased media in India is exacerbated by various challenges to press freedom , including political pressure, corporate influence, and legal threats.  The concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few conglomerates limits the diversity of viewpoints and fosters self-censorship among journalists. These challenges impede the media's ability to fulfill its democratic mandate and hold power to account.

Political pressure on media outlets is a common phenomenon in India, where governments often seek to control the narrative and suppress dissenting voices. Media outlets are made manipulated by giving them ads by the political parties for suppressing the truth and spreading rumours and fake news.

Corporate interests often wield significant influence over media organizations through ownership or advertising revenue. A prime example is the Reliance Group , one of India's largest conglomerates with interests in various sectors, including media. Reliance's ownership of a certain media platform, which controls several news channels and digital media platforms, has raised concerns about editorial independence and bias. Critics argue that Reliance's business interests may influence media coverage to favor its corporate agenda, thereby compromising journalistic integrity.

The consequences of biased media on Indian democracy are far-reaching and multifaceted. It erodes public trust in the media as an impartial source of information, leading to widespread cynicism and apathy towards democratic institutions. It undermines the pluralistic fabric of Indian society by fostering intolerance and bigotry towards marginalized communities. It compromises the integrity of electoral processes by manipulating public opinion and influencing voter behavior. Overall, biased media contributes to the erosion of democratic norms and values, posing a serious threat to the future of Indian democracy.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, misleading stories about the death toll and government responses deepened the crisis. Twitter censorship of critical tweets and pro-government channels blaming farmers’ protests for oxygen shortages distorted the truth and undermined trust in the media. This jeopardizes their ability to report objectively and hold those in power accountable. Attacks on journalists who expose corruption or criticize political leaders endanger press freedom and democratic functioning.

Sonam Wangchuk, the renowned climate activist and educationalist , recently concluded his 21-day climate fast in Leh, Ladakh. During this period, he sustained himself solely on water and salt, drawing attention to critical issues affecting the region.

Wangchuk’s fast was a powerful statement, emphasizing the need to protect Ladakh’s fragile ecology and indigenous culture . He emphasized the importance of character and foresight in addressing Ladakh’s concerns. Wangchuk’s fast garnered support from various socio-political bodies in Ladakh, including the Kargil Democratic Alliance . Members of the KDA also joined him in hunger strikes, amplifying their collective voice but big news channels and media houses ignored incident and did not provided proper coverage.

Moreover, the Sushant Singh Rajput case became a media frenzy, with sensationalism overshadowing more critical matters. The media’s obsession with Sushant Singh Rajput’s death transformed a tragic suicide into a relentless investigation, streamed live day after day.

Instead of focusing on the actual tragedy, the spotlight shifted to an actress portrayed as the evil intriguer and the perfect cinematic vamp.

The arrest of actress, after relentless pursuit, was celebrated by those addicted to this media spectacle. The media’s gossipy edge often carries deep shades of misogyny. The private-public separation blurred. While the media chased actresses and sensationalized the Rajput case, other crucial issues in the country were sidelined. The Bombay High Court recognized the harm caused by trial by media, obstructing fair criminal case investigations. The media’s role should be to inform, not to manipulate public sentiment.

The practice of accepting money from political parties to publish favorable stories or suppress negative ones, often referred to as "paid news," undermines the integrity of journalism and erodes public trust in the media. This phenomenon is particularly prevalent during election campaigns when political parties seek to manipulate public opinion and gain an unfair advantage. One notable example of paid news occurred during the run-up to the 2014 general elections in India. 

Media showed one sided news about CAA-NRC and misled minorities that led to widespread protest in country. The media played a significant role in shaping public perception of the CAA. Some channels sensationalized the issue, focusing on specific narratives while ignoring broader implications. The trial by media approach led to polarization and misinformation . Social media also played a role, with fact-checkers attempting to correct misinformation. 

Addressing the issue of biased media requires concerted efforts from multiple stakeholders, including policymakers, media professionals, civil society organizations, and the general public. There is a need for stringent regulations and mechanisms to hold media outlets accountable for ethical breaches and misinformation. Media literacy programs should be implemented to educate citizens about the importance of critical thinking and discerning reliable sources of information. Independent media watchdogs and ombudsmen should be empowered to monitor media content and address complaints from the public. Additionally, promoting diversity and plurality in the media industry through initiatives such as community media and public broadcasting can help counteract the influence of biased media conglomerates.

Biased media poses a grave threat to Indian democracy by undermining the principles of transparency , accountability, and pluralism. Its sensationalism, misinformation, and propaganda have the potential to subvert democratic processes and foster social division. Therefore, it is imperative to address the root causes of biased media and implement reforms to safeguard press freedom and media integrity. Only by upholding the highest standards of journalistic ethics and promoting media pluralism can India realize its democratic aspirations and uphold the rights of its citizens.

Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth. 

—Mahatma Gandhi

100, 200, 250, 300 & 400 Word Essay on The Role of the Media in a Democratic Society

Table of Contents

The Role of the Media in a Democratic Society 100-Word Essay

The role of media in a democratic society is of the utmost importance. The media acts as a watchdog, ensuring transparency and accountability in the government and other institutions. It provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and opinions, facilitating informed discussions on crucial matters. Moreover, the media plays a vital role in safeguarding individual freedoms by highlighting social injustices and giving a voice to marginalized groups. It empowers citizens by keeping them informed about their rights and responsibilities. By fostering an informed citizenry, the media helps in shaping public opinion and influencing policy decisions. In a democratic society, the media acts as a bridge between the government and the people, ensuring a healthy and vibrant democracy.

The Role of the Media in a Democratic Society 200-Word Essay

Media plays a crucial role in shaping and maintaining a democratic society. It acts as the bridge between the government and the citizens, providing impartial and accurate information to help citizens make informed decisions. Through its various forms such as print media, television, and the internet, the media ensures transparency and accountability in governance.

Media also serves as a platform for freedom of speech and expression, allowing different voices to be heard. It acts as a watchdog, keeping a check on the government’s actions, and holding them accountable for their decisions. Furthermore, the media helps to educate and raise awareness about social issues, promoting a sense of social responsibility among citizens.

In a democratic society, the media acts as the fourth estate, playing a crucial role in shaping public opinion. It empowers citizens by providing a platform for discussion and debate, facilitating the exchange of ideas, and promoting diversity of thought. It helps to foster a sense of community and unity among citizens by disseminating objective information and encouraging dialogue.

In conclusion, the media plays an integral role in a democratic society. It acts as a guardian of democracy, ensuring transparency, accountability, and freedom of speech. It serves as a crucial link between the government and the citizens, promoting informed decision-making and facilitating public discourse. In today’s rapidly changing world, the media’s role in a democratic society has become even more important, as it continues to adapt and evolve to meet the needs and demands of citizens.

The Role of the Media in a Democratic Society 250-Word Essay

In a democratic society, the media plays a vital role in shaping public opinion, facilitating dialogue, and holding the government accountable. It serves as a cornerstone of democracy, providing citizens with access to information and diverse viewpoints. The media acts as a watchdog, ensuring transparency and exposing corruption within the government. It also enables citizens to participate actively in the democratic process by providing a platform for political debate and discussion.

Through unbiased reporting, media organizations inform citizens about current events, allowing them to make informed decisions and participate in the democratic process. By analyzing policies, interpreting government actions, and presenting different perspectives, the media fosters critical thinking and encourages citizens to engage in thoughtful discussions. This exchange of ideas is crucial for a healthy democracy, as it ensures that all voices are heard and different viewpoints are considered.

Furthermore, the media acts as a check on government power by investigating and exposing any wrongdoing or abuses of authority. It holds the government accountable for its actions and promotes transparency in governance. By keeping the citizens informed, media organizations empower individuals to act as vigilant citizens, actively participating in the democratic process.

In conclusion, the media plays a crucial role in a democratic society by providing citizens with information, facilitating dialogue, and holding the government accountable. It serves as a platform for free speech, promoting an open and informed society. A vibrant and independent media is essential for the functioning of democracy, ensuring that power remains in check and citizens have the information they need to make informed decisions.

The Role of the Media in a Democratic Society 300-Word Essay

In a democratic society, the role of media is of paramount importance. Media acts as the voice of the people, providing information, fostering public debate, and holding those in power accountable. It plays a crucial role in shaping public opinion while acting as a bridge between governing bodies and citizens.

Informing citizens

One of the primary functions of the media in a democratic society is to inform the public. Through various channels, such as newspapers, television, radio, and online platforms, the media disseminates news, facts, and analysis about national and international events. By doing so, it ensures that citizens have access to diverse sources of information, enabling them to make informed decisions and participate effectively in the democratic process.

Fostering Public Debate

Another vital role of media in a democratic society is to foster public debate on major issues. Media creates a platform for citizens to express their views and opinions, encouraging the free exchange of ideas. It serves as a channel where differing perspectives can be heard, aiding in the formulation of well-rounded and inclusive policies. Through responsible journalism and investigative reporting, media organizations challenge power structures, thereby safeguarding democracy and preventing the concentration of power.

Holding Power Accountable

Media acts as a watchdog, holding those in power accountable for their actions and decisions. By investigating and reporting on government activities, the media exposes corruption, abuse of power, and unethical practices. This acts as a deterrent to ensure that those in power act in the best interest of the public. Through investigative reporting, the media ensures transparency and helps citizens make informed choices while electing their representatives.

In a democratic society, media plays a pivotal role in providing information, fostering public debate, and holding power accountable. Its role as a conduit for information ensures an informed citizenry, giving them the ability to participate actively in the democratic process. By fostering public debate and holding power accountable, the media acts as a catalyst for change and ensures the integrity and longevity of democratic values. Hence, the media’s role cannot be understated in safeguarding and promoting democracy.

The Role of the Media in a Democratic Society 400-Word Essay

The role of the media in a democratic society.

The media plays a crucial role in shaping and maintaining a democratic society. It serves as a watchtower, holding those in power accountable and providing citizens with the information necessary for informed decision-making. In a democratic society, the media acts as a bridge between the government and the people, ensuring transparency, accountability, and the protection of civil liberties.

One essential function of the media in a democratic society is to inform the public about current events and issues. Through journalism, media organizations report on a wide range of topics, from local news to global affairs, helping citizens to stay informed and engaged. By providing a platform for diverse viewpoints and expert analysis, the media promotes an informed and well-rounded understanding of complex issues.

Another critical role of the media is to act as a watchdog. It exposes corruption, abuses of power, and wrongdoing within institutions, including the government. Through investigative journalism, the media uncovers hidden truths, thereby holding those in power accountable. By ensuring the flow of information, the media helps prevent the rise of authoritarian tendencies and promotes transparency in democratic governance.

Moreover, the media amplifies the voices of marginalized groups and acts as a channel for public opinion. It provides a platform for individuals and interest groups to express their concerns, providing a crucial avenue for free speech and democratic participation. In doing so, the media ensures that the government is responsive to the needs and aspirations of all citizens, regardless of their class, race, or gender.

However, with great power comes great responsibility. It is essential for media organizations to maintain journalistic integrity and uphold ethical standards. Sensationalism, biases, and misinformation can undermine the democratic process, eroding public trust. Therefore, media organizations should strive to provide accurate, balanced, and reliable information to maintain the integrity of democratic societies.

In conclusion, the media plays a vital role in a democratic society by providing information, acting as a watchdog, and amplifying public voices. A free and independent media is essential to ensure a well-functioning democracy, promoting transparency, accountability, and the protection of civil liberties. As citizens, it is our responsibility to support and defend the media’s role in preserving a democratic society.

100, 200, 350 & 500 words Essay on Types of Disasters in Sports in English & Hindi

50, 100, 200, 250, 300 & 400 Word Essay on The Three Roles of the Media in a Democratic Society

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Lydia Polgreen

India Keeps Its Glorious, Messy Tradition Alive

By Lydia Polgreen

Opinion Columnist

Back in January, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India looked all but unstoppable, he visited the small city of Ayodhya for the unofficial start of his campaign to win a third term. The location was freighted with symbolism. For decades, Hindu nationalists had sought to build a temple in Ayodhya, at a spot they believe to be the birthplace of the Hindu god Ram. The only problem was that there was already a house of worship on the spot, a mosque built by a Mughal emperor in 1528. A Hindu mob had dismantled the mosque in 1992, setting off riots that killed 2,000 people, most of them Muslims. The ruins were a flashpoint of religious tensions in India for decades.

Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party promised to build the temple, and the lavish event at which Modi officially opened it was a showcase for that achievement. At the time it seemed like strong election-year messaging for a politician who built his career on the twin planks of Hindu nationalism and building a muscular new India. Unlike other politicians, the event implied, Modi made promises and kept them.

“It is the beginning of a new era,” he declared .

Feeling supremely confident, Modi had boldly asked the Indian electorate for something akin to a blank check to remake the country — control of 400 seats in Parliament in elections that began in April and concluded on June 1. And why shouldn’t he have been confident? India’s economy was the fastest-growing in the world. India had overtaken China as the world’s most-populous country. World leaders sought Modi’s support on issues ranging from the war in Ukraine to the climate crisis, cementing India’s ascent in global affairs.

But the ever unpredictable electorate of the world’s largest democracy responded to Modi’s demand for still more power resolutely: No thanks.

In a stunning rebuke, election results released on Tuesday showed that India’s voters have reduced the parliamentary share of Modi’s party by more than 60 seats , not enough for an outright majority, never mind the supermajority he had sought.

It struck me as particularly apt that despite all the fanfare about the glorious new temple in Ayodhya, Modi’s party lost the city’s parliamentary seat to a political opposition that had been all but left for dead.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

• Shop to Support Independent Journalism
• We Have Issues
• Investigations
• Ethics Policy
• Ad-Free Login

'Telling': Right-wing host catches heat for saying pro-democracy talk is 'attack on Trump'

David McAfee

Senior editor, david joined raw story in 2023 after nearly a decade of writing about the legal industry for bloomberg law. he is also a co-founder and a commissioning editor at hypatia press, a publisher that specializes in philosophical works that challenge religion or spirituality..

A right-wing media personality complained on Saturday that president Joe Biden turned his D-Day speech into an attack on Donald Trump , but was met with some backlash.

Just last week, the internet piled on conservative media personality Erick Erickson, the founder of Red State, after he complained that Justice Juan Merchan was biased against Donald Trump in the former president's criminal trial.

This time, Erickson was trying to make a point about how Biden's speech honoring military veterans who landed on the beaches of Normandy was actually a slight against his opponent in the GOP.

"I don't think it was appropriate for Biden to turn the remembrance of D-Day into a political attack on his opponent," Erickson said going into the weekend. He then got a brutal fact check from the social media network's users.

"Joe Biden did not mention Donald Trump at all during his fifteen speech. He spoke out against tyranny, dictators, and in favor of freedom and NATO," the community note reads.

Two days later, Erickson followed up, saying, "Twitter readers believe Biden didn’t turn his D-Day speech into an attack on Trump. But I think the Washington Post is right and Twitter readers are wrong." He included a screenshot of a Washington Post headline that reads, "Biden defends democracy in France, drawing implied contrast with Trump."

@StacyStateham responded to Erickson, saying, "Implied vs explicit are two different things."

"I never said explicit," the host shot back.

Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis said, "Hit dog hollers. Etc etc."

@OlgaNYC1211 also chimed in:

"Republicans believe standing against tyranny and for NATO is considered an attack these days. Very telling."

Conservative attorney George Conway had this to say to the radio host:

"Face it, Erick, anytime anyone praises anything good—patriotism, courage, honor, decency, compassion, honesty, rationality, truthfulness, just to pick a few qualities at random—that’s a devastating rebuke of Trump. Hope this helps."

Stories Chosen For You

Should trump be allowed to run for office, 'flood the zone': ex-fox news host accused of 'burying her role' in conspiracy theory.

Former Fox News host Greta Van Susteren came under fire on Saturday for purportedly trying to "bury her role" in the spreading of a Donald Trump-based conspiracy theory.

Van Susteren, more recently host for the conservative Newsmax TV, took to social media after Judge Juan Merchan informed the parties in Trump's criminal case that a suspicious Facebook comment appeared to suggest the jury had been corrupted. The so-called internet troll at the center of the scandal later admitted it was all made up.

But before that admission, Van Susteren picture of a printed copy of Merchan's notice.

"Wow!! This is BIG TROUBLE," she wrote at the time.

HuffPost reporter Yashar Ali flagged the commitment to the hoax even offline.

"While most of Fox News and even many Trump people were skeptical of the facebook comment, attorney and militant Scientologist Greta Van Susteren went with it like it was a major breaking news story," Ali wrote on Saturday. "She said 'if true,' and 'not a hoax,' but it’s the commitment to the verdict being vacated and her tone that are the issue. Even Pete Hegseth didn’t jump on it like this!"

Former Republican congressman Adam Kinzinger noticed something odd about after the admission did come out.

"This morning [Van Susteren] has posted dozens of off topic tweets in order to bury her role in spreading the misinformation about the NY jury yesterday instead of admitting her mistake. Typical," the ex-lawmaker wrote.

Authoritarian expert Ruth Ben-Ghiat responded to that claim, saying it is " yet another use for the 'flood the zone' strategy."

"Congressman, what is your problem? I posted the Judge’s letter where he reported the FB post. When did you get snarky?" Van Susteren asked in response. "I am surprised by you - I have had many good interviews with you over the years. I hope this was posted by staff and not you."

She added in a separate post, "My experience with [Kinzinger] over the years was one of mutual respect - not sure why he got snarky with me."

"The FB posting (reported by the judge) IS trouble whether true or crazy (disruptive of our judicial system that is already under fire by people)," she added.

Kinzinger then replied, " Same experience Greta . But misinformation is literally rotting political discourse, especially from someone with a good reputation. That said, let’s both strive to report truth and let the chips fall."

'Grave': Justice Alito put on notice that he might have committed an 'impeachable offense'

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito may have committed an impeachable offense in the course of defending from the upside down-flag controversy in which he's embroiled.

Former federal prosecutor Harry Litman appeared on CNN on Saturday, where he was asked about the recent scandals facing members of the nation's highest court.

The host first asked Litman what options American citizens or lawmakers have to hold someone on the Supreme Court to account for refusing to step aside on cases when they are clearly convicted out.

"They are really few," he said.

Litman went on to say that Alito, under fire for a flag associated with "Stop the Steal" efforts that was displayed on the justice's property, wrote a letter that might end up being problematic for him.

Litman said Alito "has written to the congress, saying nobody could reasonably questioned my impartiality that the flag was flying."

"Think about it for a moment. And say you were involved in a gay rights case," he added. "You were on the other side and you pass a judge's house and the gay pride flag is flying. In my mind, you can think reasonably that person won't be impartial."

The host brought up the fact that the neighbor at the heart of the alleged incident contradicted Alito's position and suggested he's "lying."

Litman then notes that "there is the discrepancy and I really think it is essential to get to the bottom of it.

"If it's the case, I am not saying it's the case, but if it is that Justice Alito sent a letter to the congress and didn't tell the truth in it. That is exceptionally grave. I think that would be an impeachable offense."

Watch below or click the link.

'You and I both know it!' MSNBC host presses Trump-aligned lawmaker in explosive interview

Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) on Saturday was pressed on MSNBC on multiple issues, including Donald Trump's record while he was in office.

Host Rev. Al Sharpton, who earlier in the extended discussion picked Donalds apart over the lawmaker's comments suggesting that "During Jim Crow, the Black family was together," next took Donalds to task regarding Trump . Donalds has been reported to be on the former president's short list for potential vice presidential nominees.

After the conversation about the Jim Crow era, Sharpton turned to Trump and how he "did nothing" after the police killing of George Floyd. Specifically, Sharpton said Trump only appears to care about criminal justice reform when it applies to his cases.

"You know the record that he was president when George Floyd was killed by police. He said nothing," the host said. "What is your response to that?"

Donalds drew attention to the First Step Act, passed under Trump.

"You were in Congress!" Sharpton shouted, pressing about Trump's actions regarding the Floyd murder.

"He didn't do anything with George Floyd," Donalds replied. "What are you talking about?"

"Exactly!" the host shouted.

At one point during the tense exchange, Sharpton shouted, "You and I both know it!"

Watch below or click the link right here.

Trump isn’t in the same league as Tony Soprano

Mitt romney bows to trump — because that's what republicans do, republican dodo birds have a death wish for us all.

Copyright © 2024 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | Manage Preferences | Debug Logs For corrections contact [email protected] , for support contact [email protected] .

Reference Examples

More than 100 reference examples and their corresponding in-text citations are presented in the seventh edition Publication Manual . Examples of the most common works that writers cite are provided on this page; additional examples are available in the Publication Manual .

To find the reference example you need, first select a category (e.g., periodicals) and then choose the appropriate type of work (e.g., journal article ) and follow the relevant example.

When selecting a category, use the webpages and websites category only when a work does not fit better within another category. For example, a report from a government website would use the reports category, whereas a page on a government website that is not a report or other work would use the webpages and websites category.

Also note that print and electronic references are largely the same. For example, to cite both print books and ebooks, use the books and reference works category and then choose the appropriate type of work (i.e., book ) and follow the relevant example (e.g., whole authored book ).

Examples on these pages illustrate the details of reference formats. We make every attempt to show examples that are in keeping with APA Style’s guiding principles of inclusivity and bias-free language. These examples are presented out of context only to demonstrate formatting issues (e.g., which elements to italicize, where punctuation is needed, placement of parentheses). References, including these examples, are not inherently endorsements for the ideas or content of the works themselves. An author may cite a work to support a statement or an idea, to critique that work, or for many other reasons. For more examples, see our sample papers .

Reference examples are covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Chapter 10 and the Concise Guide Chapter 10

Related handouts

• Common Reference Examples Guide (PDF, 147KB)
• Reference Quick Guide (PDF, 225KB)

Textual Works

Textual works are covered in Sections 10.1–10.8 of the Publication Manual . The most common categories and examples are presented here. For the reviews of other works category, see Section 10.7.

• Journal Article References
• Magazine Article References
• Newspaper Article References
• Blog Post and Blog Comment References
• UpToDate Article References
• Book/Ebook References
• Diagnostic Manual References
• Children’s Book or Other Illustrated Book References
• Classroom Course Pack Material References
• Religious Work References
• Chapter in an Edited Book/Ebook References
• Dictionary Entry References
• Wikipedia Entry References
• Report by a Government Agency References
• Report with Individual Authors References
• Brochure References
• Ethics Code References
• Fact Sheet References
• ISO Standard References
• Press Release References
• White Paper References
• Conference Presentation References
• Conference Proceeding References
• Published Dissertation or Thesis References
• Unpublished Dissertation or Thesis References
• ERIC Database References
• Preprint Article References

Data and Assessments

Data sets are covered in Section 10.9 of the Publication Manual . For the software and tests categories, see Sections 10.10 and 10.11.

• Data Set References
• Toolbox References

Audiovisual Media

Audiovisual media are covered in Sections 10.12–10.14 of the Publication Manual . The most common examples are presented together here. In the manual, these examples and more are separated into categories for audiovisual, audio, and visual media.

• Artwork References
• Clip Art or Stock Image References
• Film and Television References
• Musical Score References
• Online Course or MOOC References
• Podcast References
• PowerPoint Slide or Lecture Note References
• Radio Broadcast References
• TED Talk References
• Transcript of an Audiovisual Work References
• YouTube Video References

Online Media

Online media are covered in Sections 10.15 and 10.16 of the Publication Manual . Please note that blog posts are part of the periodicals category.

• Facebook References
• Instagram References
• LinkedIn References
• Online Forum (e.g., Reddit) References
• TikTok References
• X References
• Webpage on a Website References
• Clinical Practice References
• Open Educational Resource References
• Whole Website References

• My View My View
• Following Following
• Saved Saved

Israel pounds central Gaza as Palestinian death toll in hostage rescue raid rises to 274

Israel's military said a special forces officer was killed in exchanges of fire with militants emerging from cover in residential blocks, and that it knew of "under 100" Palestinians killed, though not how many of them were militants or civilians.