Article Sidebar
Published:
Jan 31, 2024DOI:
10.4314/jsda.v39i1.4Keywords:
Article Details
References
Barzilai-Nahon, K. (2008). Toward a theory of network gatekeeping: A framework for exploring information control. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59 (9), 1493–1512.
Barzilai-Nahon, K. (2006). Gatekeepers, virtual communities and the gated: Multidimensional tensions in cyberspace. International Journal of Communication Law and Society, Special Issue, Autumn, 1-29.
Bimber, B., and Copeland, L. (2013). Digital media and traditional political participation over time in the US. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10(2), 125-137.
Boulianne, S. (2020). Twenty years of digital media effects on civic and political participation. Communication Research, 47(7), 947-966.
Boyd, D. (2006, February). Identity production in a networked culture: Why Youth Heart MySpace. St. Louis, MO: American Association for the Advancement of Science,
Bro, P., and Wallberg, F. (2014). Digital gatekeeping. Digital Journalism, 2(3), 446-454. doi: 10.1080/21670811.2014.895507
Bryld, E., Kamau, C., and Sinigallia, D. (2013). Gatekeepers in Mogadishu. Copenhagen: Somali Cash Consortium & TINA Copenhagen in cooperation with IDC.
Buchanan, D., Boddy, D., and McCalman (1988). Getting in, getting on, getting out and getting back. In A. Bryman (ed.). Doing research in organizations (pp. 53-67). London: Routledge.
Callegaro, M., Yang, Y. (2018). The role of surveys in the era of “Big Data”. In D. Vannette, and J. Krosnick (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Survey Research (pp.175-192). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54395-6_23
Chibuwe, A., and Ureke, O. (2016). ‘Political gladiators Facebook in Zimbabwe: A descriptive analysis of intra-Zimbabwe African National Union-PF cyber wars: Baba Jukwa versus Amai Jukwa. Media, Culture and Society, 38(8), 1247-1260.
Chin-Fook, L., and Simmonds, H. (2011). Redefining gatekeeping theory for a digital generation. The McMaster Journal of Communication, 8(1), 7-34
CIPESA, (2022). Digital authoritarianism and democratic participation in Africa. www.cipesa.org
DeIuliis, D. (2015). Gatekeeping Theory from social fields to social networks. A Quarterly Review of Communication Research, 34, 4-23.
Dovbysh, O. (2021). New gatekeepers in town: How groups in Social Networking Sites influence information flows in Russia’s Provinces. Social Media and Society, 7(2), https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211013253
Gelinas, L., Pierce, R., Winkler, S., Cohen, I. G.., Lynch, H.F., and Bierer, B. E. (2017). Using social media as a Research Recruitment Tool: Ethical Issues and Recommendations. The American Journal of Bioethics, 17 (3), 3-14, doi: 10.1080/15265161.2016.1276644
Government of Zimbabwe, (2021). Cyber and Data Protection Act (Chapter 12:07). Harare
Government of Zimbabwe, (2020). Freedom of Information Act (Chapter 10: 33). Harare
Government of Zimbabwe (2007). Interception of Communications Act (Chapter 11:20). Harare
Government of Zimbabwe. (2002). Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) (Chapter 10: 27) of 2002. Harare.
Haas, A. (2014). Crowding at the frontier: Knowledge brokers, gatekeepers, boundary spanners and marginal intersecting individuals. Paris: PSL, Universites Paris-Dauphine (DRM).
Halupka, M. (2016). The rise of information activism: how to bridge dualisms and reconceptualise political participation. Information, Communication & Society, 19(10), 1487-1503, doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1119872
Helberger, N., Kleinen-von Konigslow, K., and Van der Noll, R. (2015). Regulating the new information intermediaries as gatekeepers of information diversity. Information, 17(6), 50-71
Iivari, N. (2018). Using member checking in interpretive research practice: A hermeneutic analysis of informants' interpretation of their organizational realities. Inf. Technol. People, 31, 111-133.
Kawulich, B.B. (2011). Gatekeeping: An ongoing adventure in research. Field Methods, 23(1), 57-76.
Kim, D. (2022). Taming abundance: Doing digital archival research (as political scientists). PS: Political Science & Politics, 55(3), 530-538.
Knoblauch, H. (2012). Focused ethnography and video analysis. In H. Knoblauch, B. Schnettler, J. Raab and H. Soeffner (eds.,) Video analysis: Methodology and methods—Qualitative and audiovisual data analysis in sociology (pp. 69-84.). Bristol: Peter Lang.
Knoblauch, H., and Schnettler, B. (2012): Videography: Analysing video data as ‘focused’ ethnographic and hermeneutical exercise. Qualitative Research, 12(3), 334-356. doi: 10.1177/1468794111436147
Knoll, J., Matthes, J., and Heiss, R. (2020). The social media political participation model: A goal systems theory perspective. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 26(1), 135–156.
Kovacs, N. (2017). Methodological challenges of traditional and virtual anthropological fieldwork in migrant integration research: The case of Chinese-Hungarian interethnic partner relationships. Roman Journal of Population Studies, X1 (1), 35-58.
Laidlaw, E.B. (2010). A framework for identifying Internet information gatekeepers. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 24 (3), (November) 263–276.
Lehdonvirta, V., Atte Oksanen, A., and Pekka Räsänen, P. (2021). Social media, web, and panel surveys: Using non-probability samples in social and policy research. Policy & Internet, 13(1), 134-155.
Monroe, B.L. (2013). The Five Vs of Big Data Political Science: Introduction to the Virtual Issue on Big Data in Political Science. Political Analysis, 21(V5), 1-29.
Mou, Y., Wu, K., and Atkin, D. (2016). Understanding the use of circumvention tools to bypass online censorship. New Media & Society, 18(5), 837–856.
Nickerson, D.W., and Rogers, T. (2014). Political Campaigns and Big Data. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(2), Spring, 51-74
Nyoka, P., and Tembo, M. (2022). Dimensions of democracy and digital political activism on Hopewell Chin’ono and Jacob Ngarivhume's Twitter account towards the July 31st demonstrations in Zimbabwe. Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 2024350. doi: 10.1080/23311886.2021.2024350
Pellander, S. (2016). Gatekeepers for the family: Regulating family migration to Finland. University of Helsinki, Finland.
Raifman, S., DeVost, M.A., Digitale, J.C. et al. (2022). Respondent-Driven Sampling: a Sampling Method for Hard-to-Reach Populations and Beyond. Curr Epidemiol Rep, 9, 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40471-022-00287-87
Raven, M.E. (2014). Gatekeepers, guardians and gate-crashers: the enactment of protocols to protect indigenous knowledge, and how protocols order these practices. PhD Thesis, Murdoch University.
Reeves, C. L. (2010). A difficult negotiation: Fieldwork relations with gatekeepers. Qualitative Research, 10(3), 315-331.
Robles-Morales, J.M., and Córdoba-Hernández, A.M. (2019). Digital political participation, social networks and big data (pp.17-23). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27757-4_2
Roberts, C. (2005). Gatekeeping theory: An evolution. Paper presented for Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Ross, A. (2011). ‘Internet freedom: An interview with Alec Ross’. Brookings Institution, 16 April, 2011.
Rottinghaus, B., and Escher, T. (2020). Mechanisms for inclusion and exclusion through digital political participation: Evidence from a comparative study of online consultations in three German cities. Z Politkwiss, 30, 261-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41358-020-00222-7
Sanghera, G. S., and Thapar-Björkert, S. (2008). Methodological dilemmas: Gatekeepers and positionality in Bradford. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 31(3), 543-562. doi: 10.1080/01419870701491952
Sato, I. (2012). ‘Gatekeeper’ as a metaphor and concept. Hitotsubashi Journal of Commerce and Management, 46(1), 41-50.
Shoemaker, P.J., and Vos, T. (2009). Gatekeeping theory. London: Routledge
Singh, S., and Wassenaar, D.R. (2016). Contextualising the role of the gatekeepers in Social Science Research. South African Journal of BL, 9(1), 42-46. doi:7196/SAJBL465
Sinpeng, A. (2020). Digital media, political authoritarianism, and internet controls in Southeast Asia. Media, Culture and Society, 42(1), 25-39.
Subotic, J. (2021). Ethics in archival research on political violence. Journal of Peace Research, 58(3), 342-354.
Tanczer, L. M, McConville, R., and Maynard, P. (2016). Censorship and surveillance in the digital age: The technological challenges for academics. Journal of Global Security Studies, 1(4), 346-355.
Tariq, R., Zolkepli, I.A., and Ahmad, M. (2022). Political participation of young voters: tracing direct and indirect effects of social media and political orientation. Social Sciences, 11(81), 1-21.
Turney, L., and Pcknee, C. (2005). Virtual Focus Groups: new frontiers in research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 4(2), 32-43.
Unver, M.B. (2022). Threading the needle from ‘interoperability’ to ‘gatekeeping’: Quest for a layered model. International Review of Law, Computers and Technology, 36(2), 223-250.
Vaccari, C., and Valeriani, A. (2018). Digital political talk and political participation: Comparing established and Third Wave democracies. Special Collection: SMaPP Global Special Issue-SAGE Open, April-June: 1-14. doi: 10.1177/2158244018784986
Vial, G. (2019). Reflections on quality requirements for digital trace data in IS research. Decision Support Systems, 126, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2019.113133
Vitak, J. (2012). The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 56(4), 451–470. doi:10.1080/08838151.2012.732140
Zúñiga, H., Molyneux, L., and Zheng, P (2014). Social media, political expression, and political participation: Panel analysis of lagged and concurrent relationships. Journal of Communication, 64 (4), 612– 634, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12103
Zúñiga, H., Veenstra, A., Vraga, E., and Shah, D. (2010). Digital democracy: Reimagining pathways to political participation. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 7, 36-51
Main Article Content
Coping with gatekeeping in digitalised political participation research: a Zimbabwean experience
Langtone Maunganidze
Abstract
Globally, the upsurge in internet and social media usage has prompted new ways of gatekeeping and coping strategies significantly transforming the character of political participation research and practice with far-reaching implications for consolidation of democratic governance and social development. Social networking sites and mobile instant messaging platforms have triggered new forms of both political mobilization and resistance calling into question the efficacy and sustainability of the traditional gatekeeping in research. There is little doubt that the nuances and dynamics of digitalized gatekeeping have a profound capacity to facilitate and inhibit the research process. Through a combination of a critical review of documentary information and snippets of practical experiences drawn from Zimbabwe, the article examines the various gatekeeping mechanisms in digitalized political participation research and delineates the possible circumvention interventions. The main dimensions of digital user surveillance and profiling technologies at various levels of the research process are not only mutually reinforcing but also largely panoptic. Since gatekeeping mechanisms in digital research are situated at the meeting point of internet freedom and surveillance, they inadvertently evoke methodological and ethical challenges.
