aau/MüllerHow are digital platforms reshaping the formation of public opinion? What role do Big Tech companies, peripheral actors, and new forms of media consumption play in this process? In this interview, Valerie Hase reflects on current developments and argues for a more nuanced understanding of today’s highly diverse media landscape.
Professor Hase, are you pleased to be working as a media and communications researcher today rather than 30 years ago?
We are living through an intellectually fascinating period, which naturally offers many advantages from a research perspective. Researchers in our field are currently in great demand when it comes to understanding the phenomena shaping our rapidly changing media environment. Questions such as: What impact is Big Tech having on society? How can disinformation be countered? How should we respond to filter bubbles? The current climate of overlapping crises also places considerable demands on research. There are an enormous number of issues that warrant investigation, yet academic research cannot always keep pace with the speed of these developments.
At the same time, you now have entirely new methodological tools available for analysing people’s media behaviour.
That is true. Much of my work is situated at the intersection with computer science and frequently involves automated methods. However, I would also sound a note of caution: the fact that something can now be done more quickly and on a larger scale does not necessarily mean that it is better. Rigorous analysis still requires time. It is also important to me not simply to incorporate computer science into the social sciences, but rather to use new methods to examine genuinely social-scientific phenomena.
How do you perceive current developments in the media landscape?
Societies have always developed new formats and new forms of media, and these have always required time before becoming socially accepted. We have seen this repeatedly throughout history: new media are often adopted very rapidly, while more critical reflection tends to emerge only later. The Arab Spring provides a useful example. When the uprisings began in the early 2010s, social media platforms played a significant role in providing a democratic communication infrastructure for the movement. At the time, social media were widely regarded as tools capable of supporting democratisation processes. Today, in light of the societal experiences of the past decade, we would almost certainly view this much more critically.
Traditional media organisations are coming under increasing pressure, including economic pressure. Can they survive under current conditions?
I believe that we should pay greater attention to diversity. We are currently dealing not only with multiple generations of media consumers, but also with highly diverse patterns of media use across many different dimensions. Across all groups, tracking studies that passively follow people’s online behaviour — with their consent — show that people consume relatively little news overall. News consumption accounts for only around three to five per cent of total internet use. At the same time, however, it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish clearly between news content and other forms of content. Much of what people do online has little to do with news consumption. Equally, much of everyday life has never been directly connected to information-seeking behaviour. People have always been able to avoid news consumption — whether by no longer opening a newspaper or by avoiding those areas of social media platforms where news content is likely to appear.
Is this primarily a problem among younger people?
I would challenge that assumption. I do not subscribe to the dramatisation of claims that young people today are uninformed or misinformed. What is lacking — across all age groups — is sufficient media literacy to critically evaluate the content we encounter, both online and offline.
The proposed ban on social media use for children under the age of 14 is intended to address many of these concerns.
I do not believe that it is particularly effective simply to postpone access by a few years if this is not accompanied by broader measures aimed at improving media literacy. The example of Australia also demonstrates that people will always find ways to circumvent control mechanisms.
Do we still require professionally trained journalists?
I believe that the continued existence of traditional journalism, with its professional standards and routines, is both valuable and important. At the same time, other actors are increasingly taking on roles that also serve the purpose of informing the public. This can be observed particularly clearly during crises, when citizens on the ground report directly on events unfolding in their immediate surroundings..
How do researchers distinguish between these different actors?
That distinction is becoming increasingly difficult. In research, we refer to “peripheral actors” — individuals who cannot simply be identified through affiliation with a traditional news organisation, but who engage with journalism from outside established institutional structures. Influencers are one example, as are individuals working as social media managers within news organisations who also disseminate journalistic content. In many respects, this development is beneficial because it introduces new perspectives. The other side of the matter, of course, concerns the question of trust: whom can we rely upon?
The influence of Big Tech companies on Western liberal democracies is often viewed extremely critically. How do you assess these effects?
Yes, there are deeply problematic attacks on democratic systems, and yes, it is concerning that this communication infrastructure is owned almost exclusively by large technology corporations. I share the concern that Big Tech companies have accumulated substantial power over the formation of public opinion. At the same time, however, I would point out that around ten years ago we witnessed a similarly moralising panic surrounding video games. At that time, highly alarming scenarios were advanced suggesting that young men who played video games would inevitably become violent or even develop into perpetrators of mass attacks. Those predictions also failed to materialise. I believe that we repeatedly encounter debates of this kind in which no single solution is capable of resolving every issue. Instead, action is required on multiple levels. We need regulation at the European level, media literacy programmes, and the political determination to implement these measures effectively. At present, many regulatory efforts are being systematically undermined.
Your work relies heavily on data. Does this mean that you now have virtually unlimited access to information about media use?
No, that is not the case. There was certainly a period often described as the golden age of Big Data, when many people assumed that data would become the new oil. Today, however, many forms of access are no longer available. Some platforms still provide programming interfaces, and we undoubtedly have access to more data than was available before the emergence of the internet. Nevertheless, this does not automatically mean that these data are substantially better than traditional surveys or established research instruments. What matters is the intelligent combination of methods in ways that generate genuine added value. Researchers also have a responsibility to handle data and sources carefully and responsibly.
How do you personally consume news?
I still subscribe to a newspaper, although I read the digital edition rather than the printed version. Podcasts are also an important trend, and I listen to many of them myself. They make it possible to engage in other activities at the same time, such as cleaning the flat or going for a walk. Their comparatively long format also creates a sense of deceleration. This aligns with the idea of slow journalism, which seeks to engage with subjects in greater depth. Listeners can also decide for themselves when they listen, to whom they listen, and for how long. Control remains with the audience, and that makes the format particularly attractive.
.flex_column.av-rfhm17o-403c9b2aefb397bf083a4fab10fdf59e{
border-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;
padding:25px 25px 25px 25px;
}
#top .av-special-heading.av-mx77dyc-7e972f75763aadcb8a251d6bc33c786c{
margin:0px 0px 0px 0px;
padding-bottom:0;
}
body .av-special-heading.av-mx77dyc-7e972f75763aadcb8a251d6bc33c786c .av-special-heading-tag .heading-char{
font-size:25px;
}
.av-special-heading.av-mx77dyc-7e972f75763aadcb8a251d6bc33c786c .av-subheading{
font-size:15px;
}
About Valerie Hase
Valerie Hase joined the Department of Media and Communications within the Faculty of Social Sciences as Professor of Digital Media and Communication in November 2025 and is head of the newly established Digital Media and Methods Lab. Her research examines how digital media influence the formation of public opinion. She investigates how information circulates across different platforms, including within digital news environments and in crisis and conflict contexts such as terrorism, digital propaganda, and climate change communication. Another major focus of her work is the development and refinement of digital research methods at the intersection of social science and computer science, particularly in the fields of automated content analysis, digital behavioural data, and biases in computational social science. Her new project, funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), examines the influence of Big Tech and digital platforms on democracy by addressing the following question: do digital platforms increase the diversity of news, or do they threaten diversity of opinion?
Der Beitrag “I do not subscribe to the dramatisation of claims that young people today are uninformed or misinformed.” erschien zuerst auf University of Klagenfurt.