Global synthesis

Information ecosystem and troubled democracy

A Global Synthesis of the State of Knowledge on News Media, AI and Data Governance

This inaugural meta-analysis provides a critical assessment of the role of information ecosystems in the Global North and Global Majority World, focusing on their relationship with information integrity (the quality of public discourse), the fairness of political processes, the protection of media freedoms, and the resilience of public institutions.

The report addresses three thematic areas with a cross-cutting theme of mis- and disinformation:

  • Media, Politics and Trust;
  • Artificial Intelligence, Information Ecosystems and Democracy;
  • and Data Governance and Democracy.

The analysis is based mainly on academic publications supplemented by reports and other materials from different disciplines and regions (1,664 citations selected among a total corpus of over +2700 resources aggregated). The report showcases what we can learn from landmark research on often intractable challenges posed by rapid changes in information and communication spaces.

This report is not just an academic exercise − it is a roadmap for policymakers, researchers, and civic leaders committed to preserving and strengthening the democratic potential of our global information ecosystems.

Courtney C. Radsch

Chair of the Observatory Steering Comittee

Synthesis

Overview and key findings

Digital communication technologies have enabled decentralization and rapid increase of information and content production which has fundamentally transformed our information landscape. While this shift has democratized access to information and the creation of knowledge, it has also simplified and magnified the means of distributing disinformation, undermining our ability to discern valuable information and jeopardizing informed democratic participation.

As stated in the Global Digital Compact, democracy cannot thrive if information ecosystems are prone to the ‘substitution of lies for factual truth’.

While research is flourishing, our complex and rapidly evolving information ecosystems are characterized by a lack of scientific consensus on implications for information integrity and democracy. As the development of advanced digital technologies continues to grow in power and sophistication, so does the urgent need to foster a collective understanding of ongoing changes in society and politics in tandem with the continuing transformations of the information and communication spaces.

This global meta-research aims to contribute to this effort, by bridging the evidence gap through the synthesis of multidisciplinary research, identifying key obstacles, and providing comprehensive, evidence-based insights.

This study begins from the premise that the design and development, as well as the beneficial and harmful uses of digital technologies, are not simply driven by technological change; they are the result of human decisions and human action.

Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to reveal the interdependence of the multiple factors that explain why information ecosystems are contributing to this fragility. Throughout our report we treat mis- and disinformation as both symptoms of complex changes in society and as important amplifiers of these changes and we recognize that these kinds of information are only one – important – factor that is troubling for democracy.

What did we learn from the first research cycle ?

Figure. WordCloud illustrating the content of the 1,664 sources analysed by the OID. Words sizes are determined according to how often they occur in the text.

Overarching challenges

  • There is broad consensus that states have a duty to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms. The need for research on how international human rights law is interpreted and applied at regional and country levels was emphasized repeatedly.
  • Data monetization for profit is a significant issue, with big tech business models driving developments in the infrastructure and application layers of information ecosystems. This includes influencing network neutrality policies and undermining the financial stability of news organizations. Research is needed to explore how these business models contribute to mis- and disinformation campaigns, as well as to formulate strategies for mitigating harmful power dynamics.
  • Significant lack in research regarding exclusions and inequitable inclusions in information ecosystems, particularly in relation to the Global Majority World. Many studies from the Global North overlook the lack of meaningful internet connectivity for millions and fail to acknowledge the diverse ownership and regulatory frameworks of global news media. In addition, the harmful impacts of AI on marginalized communities are not adequately recognized.
  • Conflicting views on whether accountability and transparency in Governance is either too permissive or too restrictive. When deemed overly permissive, prioritizes economic self-interest at the expense of rights protection, while overly restrictive governance often involves State suppression of free speech.
  • Strong consensus on the need for transparency in AI systems and independent audits, along with the importance of disseminating accurate information to various stakeholders to ensure accountability for big tech companies and government.
  • Media and Information Literacy (MIL) is crucial for equipping both children and adults with the skills to combat harmful information, but it is not a silver bullet. It’s a critical piece of a broader Education and Public Awareness strategy to ensure public understanding of the potential implications of mis- and disinformation and the lack of algorithmic transparency on their lives, and achieve their meaningful participation in the public sphere.

What we know about the state of knowledge

Figure. ​​Bar chart illustrating the countries represented in the literature of the OID by number of studies. The most studied countries are: US, India, Brazil, UK, China, Germany, Australia, and France.

  • Research on mis- and disinformation is heavily biased towards Eurocentric and Western perspectives. Studies on companies producing discriminatory outcomes from datafication primarily focus on a handful of large US firms, with few comprehensive assessments globally, aside from some comparative surveys. Understanding the experiences of the Global Majority World is essential for shaping effective policy and intervention strategies.

Figure. The bar chart shows a topic breakdown of the literature from the OID first report. From the quantitative analysis of the literatures text it arises that literature in the global majority world predominantly talks about information freedom and data governance while that in the global north rather focuses on content moderation and political news consumption. The bar chart shows aggregate figures.

  • Inconsistencies in how key concepts related to information ecosystems are defined across different disciplines and regions. There is a call for greater interdisciplinary dialogue to bridge these gaps and develop a more coherent framework for understanding issues of information integrity, public discourse, and democracy.
  • A balanced approach that includes both quantitative and qualitative research is needed to comprehensively explore the interdependent dynamics within information ecosystems.
  • Critical need for enhanced access to data for researchers, with clear data disclosure policies and environments that protect researchers from political pressures. The integrity and independence of research institutions must be safeguarded to facilitate unbiased inquiries, especially in sensitive areas such as AI development and electoral integrity.
  • Securing the independence of researchers is essential for ensuring the validity and transparency of their findings. Challenges to research independence arise when results challenge politically sensitive narratives or corporate claims, highlighting the contentious nature of studying mis- and disinformation within information ecosystems.

Methodology

Methodology

The Observatory officially launched its first work cycle in October 2023 during the Internet Governance Forum in Kyoto, Japan, following a prefiguration phase and stakeholder consultations. The Observatory Steering Committee outlined the priority themes for the inaugural report: News Media, AI Systems, and Data Governance, focusing on the challenges posed by mis- and disinformation to public discourse and political integrity.

Rather than undertaking original research, the Observatory’s mandate is to conduct a critical synthesis of state-of-the-art research. As such, the report synthesizes existing evidence based on a critical review of the literature informed by expert consultations.

The report:

  • Summarizes existing research, pointing to areas and topics of scientific consensus;
  • Highlights significant gaps in the evidence base;
  • Identifies priorities for future research.

Limitations

Limitations

The research contains several important limitations. This report does not aim to provide specific recommendations to policymakers and only discusses socio-economic inequalities as they arise in cited studies, rather than as a primary focus. Our main emphasis is on the upper service applications layer of information ecosystems, with some reference to issues like network neutrality and zero-rating at the infrastructure layer.

We have emphasized the dominance of Global North perspectives in research compared to the Global Majority. Additionally, several relevant areas, including digital divides, cybersecurity, geopolitics, and the economics of digital markets, were not within the scope of this report. Our focus is primarily on country-level experiences rather than micro-level or sector-specific insights, and we do not include technology use cases. Finally, our analysis is constrained by the research questions set by communities, funding availability, and access to data.

Thematic reports

Chapters

Thematic report

Information ecosystems and democracy (chapter 1)

This chapter begins with an introduction that frames the central themes of the report, covers the key concepts and definitions, delves into the challenges facing democracies focusing on mis- and disinformation, acknowledges the limitations of the report and provides an outline of the report.

Thematic report

News Media, Information Integrity and the Public Sphere (chapter 2)

This chapter examines what research tells us about the multiple causes and consequences of changes in legacy and online news media, and what can be done to promote information integrity and a democratic public sphere.

Thematic report

Artificial Intelligence, Information Integrity and Democracy (chapter 3)

This chapter examines research on the properties of AI systems (specifically machine learning algorithms) and how they are embedded in online content governance systems.

Thematic report

Big Tech and Governing Uses of Data (chapter 4)

This chapter examines evidence on the relationships between the power of big tech companies and approaches to governing the practices of data extraction and use – that is, processes of datafication.

Thematic report

Awareness of Mis- and Disinformation and the Literacy Challenge (chapter 5)

This chapter focuses on people’s knowledge about the presence of mis- and disinformation in the information ecosystems they participate in, and literacy training initiatives that enable people to identify these types of information and to protect themselves from harmful consequences

Thematic report

Governing Information Ecosystems: Legislation and Regulation (chapter 6)

This chapter provides an account of selected legislative and regulatory tools that are available to governments to mitigate the harms of mis- and disinformation and to govern the way mainly big tech companies operate.

Information ecosystem and troubled democracy – Interactive Map

Developed using GarganText by the OID in partnership with CNRS Institute for Complex Systems.

This map represents a statistical summary of the thematic content of the report. The network graph represents relations between the words in the report, placing them closer to each other the more they are related. The bigger the node, the more present the word is, signalling its role in defining what the report is about. The colors represent words that are closely related to each other and can be interpreted as a topic.

The map is generated by the OID using GarganText – developed by the CNRS Institute of Complex Systems –on the basis of the repot’s text. Starting from a co-occurrence matrix generated from report’s text, GarganText forms a network where words are connected if they are likely to occur together. Clustering is conducted based on the Louvain community detection method, and the visualisation is generated using the Force Atlas 2 algorithm.