November 7-8,2024

University of Salzburg (Austria)

Deadline: July 28, 2024

Workshop 2024 of the Network Media Structures

Organiser: Network Media Structures and Dept. of Communication Studies at the University of Salzburg

Extended Abstracts: 500-1.000 words including references

Submission: 28 July 2024 as PDF to the address tales.tomaz@plus.ac.at (Subject: “Abstract NMS24”)

Context

The Network Media Structures offers a transnational platform for researchers who deal with media structures and media organisations from a political, historical, economic, legal or sociological perspective. The Network is originally based in German-speaking countries, but this workshop also invites the international community to participate.

Theoretical, methodological and empirical contributions, case studies and comparative work that address one or more aspects of the broad understanding of media structures are welcome. All those interested in researching media structures – especially early career scholars (doctoral candidates, students) – are invited to submit papers.

This workshop will focus in particular on questions of European platform policy. Digital platforms have become a key element of contemporary communication systems (Flensburg & Lai, 2020; Humprecht et al., 2022). They increasingly play an intermediary role in the distribution of media content, structuring its consumption across the globe. In addition, they have become crucial spaces of civic discourse and cultural expression beyond the media themselves.

After an early phase in which these developments were seen as “democratisers”, this optimism has vanished. Digital platforms are now held responsible for several problems such as the spread of misinformation, hate speech and privacy infringements (Miller & Vaccari, 2020). On top of that, they are often held responsible for undermining the sustainability of the business model of many media organisations, deemed essential for an informed citizenry (Trappel & Tomaz, 2021). Accordingly, these developments may be regarded as a threat to democracy.

The European Union has reacted to this context introducing a comprehensive package of media and platform legislation. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) establishes a baseline for data collection and processing, drawing on the understanding that data is central in the business model of Internet companies and prone to privacy infringements. The Digital Services Act (DSA) and the Digital Markets Act (DMA) introduce specific responsibilities on platforms, requiring more transparency in their moderation and recommendation processes and limiting abuse of market power by very large platforms. In 2024, the AI Act and the Media Freedom Act (EMFA) have expanded this framework, striving respectively for a safe adoption of automated decision-making and for protection of media independence vis-a-vis interference both from politics and digital intermediaries. This is not to mention the amendment of already existing legislation, such as the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD), to account for the interaction between media and platforms.

This approach differs considerably from early communication policy in the EU, which clearly distinguished between content producers and distributors, and was more concerned with issues such as media ownership concentration, must-carry obligations, universality, and promotion of public interest content, to name a few (Picard & Pickard, 2017). Communication policy was also often a matter of concern for member states, with the EU refraining from intervention. But there are also continuities. The EMFA indicates some prevalence of the idea of promoting findability and discoverability of public interest content, and some aspects of the DSA can also be interpreted as an updated version of must-carry obligations.

In the context, the workshop is particularly interested in the following questions:

• How are EU policymakers conceiving the relation between media and platforms in their regulatory proposals since the rise of the digital intermediaries?

• Which ideas from the toolkit of traditional media policy remain present in the new EU media and platform regulatory framework? Which ones are absent?

• How are the German-speaking countries interpreting and applying these ideas in their specific contexts? Are there specific developments that diverge from the EU trend?

• How are different stakeholders, such as media groups, digital companies, politicians, journalists and activists reacting to these developments?

• What should we expect as further developments in the European media and platform regulation?

In addition to contributions on these questions, open-topic submissions are also possible and welcome. If you are planning a contribution or a discourse format with a different thematic focus that could be of interest to members of the network, we will be happy to create a space/time for it. Please also submit your proposal with the same deadline and format (extended abstract). We will then try to find a suitable slot.

We expect abstracts of 500 to 1.000 words. Submissions are requested by 28 July 2024 and should be sent to tales.tomaz@plus.ac.at with the subject "Abstract NMS24". We kindly ask you to submit your abstract in anonymised form, i.e. with a separate cover sheet on which the title of the article, names of authors and contact details are noted.

Contacts & further information

Organisers:

Josef Trappel (josef.trappel@plus.ac.at)

Tales Tomaz (tales.tomaz@plus.ac.at)

Division of Media Policy and Media Economics, Dept. of Communication Studies

University of Salzburg

Network head:

Leyla Dogruel: leyla.dogruel@uni-erfurt.de

Dirk Arnold: dirk.arnold@uni-leipzig.de

References 

Flensburg, S., & Lai, S. S. (2020). Comparing Digital Communication Systems: An empirical framework for analysing the political economy of digital infrastructures. Nordicom Review, 41(2), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2020-0019

Griffin, R. (2023). Public and private power in social media governance: Multistakeholderism, the rule of law and democratic accountability. Transnational Legal Theory, 14(1), 46–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2023.2203538

Humprecht, E., Castro Herrero, L., Blassnig, S., Brüggemann, M., & Engesser, S. (2022). Media systems in the digital age: An empirical comparison of 30 countries. Journal of Communication, 72(2), 145–164. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqab054

Miller, M. L., & Vaccari, C. (2020). Digital threats to democracy: Comparative lessons and possible remedies. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 25(3), 333–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220922323

Picard, R. G., & Pickard, V. (2017). Essential principles for contemporary media and communications policymaking. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/our-research/essential-principles-contemporary-media-and-communications-policymaking

Rahman, K. S., & Teachout, Z. (2020). From private bads to public goods: Adapting public utility regulation for informational infrastructure. Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. https://knightcolumbia.org/content/from-private-bads-to-public-goods-adapting-public-utility-regulation-for-informational-infrastructure

Trappel, J., & Tomaz, T. (2021). Democratic performance of news media: Dimensions and indicators for comparative studies. In J. Trappel & T. Tomaz (Hrsg.), The Media for Democracy Monitor 2021: How leading news media survive digital transformation (Bd. 1, S. 11–53). Nordicom. https://doi.org/10.48335/9789188855404-1