In democratic countries, the media is the arena where politics and political ideas are framed and contested. Citizens rely on the media to understand the condition of their country or stay informed about other recent and important events
Historically, legacy media institutions held a monopoly on shaping whatever information that was available to the public. Legacy media institutions are mass media institutions that dominate in the production and distribution of information. These institutions, ranging from newspapers to television networks, determined which stories were told and how they were framed. In the United States, the origins of modern legacy media can be traced to the late 1890s, during intense competition between newspaper publishers like William Randolph Hearst (publisher of the New York Journal) and Joseph Pulitzer (publisher of the New York World). Today, media corporations like: Fox Corporation, Walt Disney, Warner Bros, Paramount, and Hearst Communications continue to play a significant role in shaping public discourse in democracies. Yet, despite their notable influence, the emergence of digital platforms has disrupted their dominance, by decentralising the production of “news”, thereby creating new possibilities for democratic politics.
Today, social media platforms have significantly lowered the barriers to entry into public discourse. According to Oxford’s Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ), 54% of individuals in the US get their news from social media and podcasts. Individuals are no longer passive consumers of the information distributed by the major channels; rather, citizens now express their opinions, share information, and engage in political debates across a wide range of platforms. Now, not only can anyone opine in politics, citizens also have an excess of sites to collect information about public discourse.
Philosopher, John Dewey, described democracy as a “way of life,” sustained by the propensity for people to think together in public and act on the basis of considered judgment. From Dewey’s perspective, democracy must require a public that is able to engage in the constant reflection needed for judgement. Yet, this is not always the case.
Our current media environment diverges sharply from Dewey’s ideal.
Rather than fostering thoughtful deliberation, digital platforms often prioritize speed, engagement, and emotional reaction. Media institutions—from legacy outlets to global digital platforms—have increasingly collapsed into noise and spectacle. The rise of artificial intelligence has further intensified this situation. Algorithms designed to maximize user engagement tend to promote sensational and emotionally charged content rather than accurate or reliable information. As a result, misinformation spreads rapidly, contributing to a growing crisis of trust and weakening the informational foundations necessary for democratic politics.
What does this mean for the developing countries
Digital platforms have created new opportunities for political mobilization and visibility. In October 2020, a twitter campaign in Nigeria led to a decentralised nation-wide movement against police brutality. It ended in the dissolution of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS), a police unit notorious for extortion and abuse of power. In Kenya, a Twitter influencer, Amerix, sparked the summer 2024 protests against Kenya’s proposed financial tax. And late last year, there was a mass movement to end child marriage and femicide in Nigeria which started through hashtags “#justiceforOchanya,” a victim of Nigeria’s rape culture. hese examples demonstrate how digital platforms can amplify marginalized voices and bring attention to issues often ignored by traditional media.
Still, while this expanded visibility redistributes symbolic power, there are multiple risks associated with these digital platforms, particularly during elections. As discussed previously, these platforms use algorithms, powered by artificial intelligence, that are more interested in engagement than truth. Coordinated networks of bots, trolls, and paid influencers can spread misinformation at scale, using tools such as deepfakes and synthetic texts. These forms of content are difficult to verify and can significantly distort public perception. This situation has already been observed in recent elections like: America’s 2024 elections, South Africa’s 2024 elections and it is expected in Nigeria’s upcoming 2027 election.
In addition to misinformation, digital platforms often amplify divisive narratives.
In a country like Nigeria where social and political identities are closely tied to ethnicity and religion, online content is often weaponised to exacerbate existing tensions. Algorithmic systems tend to promote content that generates strong emotional reactions, which often includes fear-based or polarizing narratives. A recent example is the muslim-fulani herdsmen terrorism in the north central regions of the country. As a result, democratic politics becomes increasingly entangled with the manipulation of identity and emotion, rather than reasoned debate and collective decision-making.
Finally, another critical concern is the dependence of developing countries on foreign-owned digital platforms. Most major platforms are controlled by companies that are based in the Global North, raising concerns about sovereignty and control over the flow of data. This has led to the emergence of scholarly interest in the concept of “digital colonialism,” which describes the ways in which digital infrastructures can reproduce patterns of external domination. If the governments of these global digital platforms become interested in regime change in Nigeria, would it be possible to manipulate the Nigerian public through social media? This is a valid concern that many scholars are currently grappling with.
Ultimately, the rise of global digital platforms has contributed to what many describe as the post truth era, in which the distinction between fact and falsehood is increasingly blurred. While citizens are now expected to take greater responsibility for evaluating information, this burden cannot rest on individuals alone. Governments in developing countries must play an active role in balancing the situation and increasing the probability for effective democracy. Personally, I have been looking into bargaining systems: how can developing countries increase their bargaining power or leverage compared to global digital platforms without overregulation?