From headline to hashtags: a comparative analysis of media’s transformation in terms of protests and crisis reporting

Abstract

This research paper examines the contrasting roles of traditional media and social media in cases of protests and crises, focusing on issues such as censorship, immediacy, audience engagement, credibility, reliability, and public trust. While traditional media has long been considered a primary source of news, in the modern world, the engagement of social media in reporting is increasing daily. Recent events in Bangladesh, such as the July protest and the recent jet crash, have highlighted the limitations of traditional media in reporting due to political and editorial pressure, resulting in incomplete or filtered news. In contrast, social media platforms provided access to a wide range of information, including real-time and ground-level reporting, which helped inform and better understand the actual situation of the events. This paradox is not exclusive to Bangladesh; similar events are also evident in global history, such as the Arab Spring, the Hong Kong protests, Turkey’s Gezi Park movement, and the ongoing movement in Indonesia and Nepal. In traditional media, the communication is largely one-way despite having various sources of reporting and publication. Conversely, various social media platforms and access to a wide range of information, including two-way communication, facilitate easy reporting and engagement with the public. This research employs a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative protest cases and territorial incidents with qualitative interviews of civilians and journalists. By combining Bangladesh and global cases, it will compare whether traditional media can still claim to be authentic while being pressured by upper levels and truthful, where news is coming from social media also, and whether social media has gained the trust of the public to be considered as an authentic and democratic source of information.