Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 258

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modelling Contemporary Gatekeeping: The rise of individuals, algorithms and platforms in digital news dissemination

Open access
Wallace, Julian·2018·Digital Journalism

Abstract

Gatekeeping theory struggles to describe the rise of algorithms and users as information selectors in digital spaces. Algorithms and users may co-exist as decision-makers and reach high visibility through decentralised gatekeeping mechanisms. Classic gatekeeping theory is no longer adequate in describing contemporary news selection processes online and recent gatekeeping approaches at theory-building are isolated and have not been synthesised in a coherent gatekeeping theory. This theoretical paper addresses this issue and develops a digital gatekeeping model in three steps. First, four gatekeeper archetypes are identified that differ in access, selection criteria and publication choices. Second, gatekeeping frequently involves platforms on which gatekeepers operate. These platforms either apply gatekeeping mechanisms controlled by a central authority or rely on collaborations between many micro-level interactions to publish news. Third, a digital gatekeeping model is derived to model the four gatekeeper archetypes and their selection processes in relation to platforms employing collaborative gatekeeping mechanisms. This proposed digital gatekeeping model extends previous research on gatekeeping by synthesising classic gatekeeping theory with contemporary approaches and by providing a framework for future research on information control and dissemination.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/21670811.2017.1343648

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 60 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. 10.1177/107769906904600110 · doi:10.1177/107769906904600110
  2. 10.1007/978-3-531-91562-3 · doi:10.1007/978-3-531-91562-3
  3. Bui Cam Ly, 2010, Global Media Journal: American Edition, 9, 1
  4. 10.1007/978-3-319-04666-2 · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-04666-2
  5. 10.1177/107769908906600405 · doi:10.1177/107769908906600405
  6. 10.1007/s11616-015-0230-z · doi:10.1007/s11616-015-0230-z
  7. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262525374.003.0009 · doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262525374.003.0009 · Paper page
  8. 10.1007/978-3-8349-4009-4 · doi:10.1007/978-3-8349-4009-4
  9. Shoemaker Pamela J., 1991, Gatekeeping. Communication Concepts 3
  10. Shoemaker Pamela J., 2010, Brazilian Journalism Research, 6, 55
  11. 10.1080/21670811.2013.801686 · doi:10.1080/21670811.2013.801686

Cited by

See all 258

Metadata

Authors
Wallace, J.
Venue
Digital Journalism
Published
2017-07-13
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
274-293
ISSN
  • 2167-0811 (ISSN-L)
  • 2167-082X
OpenAlex
W2734389702
Cited by
258
References
60
FWCI
25.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Modelling Contemporary Gatekeeping: The rise of individuals, algorithms and platforms in digital news dissemination. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/21670811.2017.1343648
The paper
Wallace, J. (2018). Modelling Contemporary Gatekeeping: The rise of individuals, algorithms and platforms in digital news dissemination. Digital Journalism. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1343648

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.