GFMD Policy & Advocacy Center
GFMD Homepage
  • GFMD Policy & Advocacy
  • GFMD Initiatives
    • Tech and Journalism Crisis and Emergency Mechanism (T&JM)
      • Consultations/meetings Reports
        • Consultation Report - Jan, 25th, 2023 - Riga
        • Consultation Report - Feb, 21st 2023 - Paris
      • Monitoring Organisations
      • Resources and Literature Review
    • Dynamic Coalition on the Sustainability of Journalism and News Media
      • Articles & Resources
      • Conferences, events, and session recordings
        • IGF 2023 Session: Data, Access & Transparency: A Trifecta for Sustainable News
        • IGF 2022 Session: Unbreaking the news: Media sustainability in the digital age
        • Frenemies: reinventing the Big Tech versus journalism dynamic (RightsCon 2022)
    • EU Media Advocacy Working Group
      • EU Advocacy - 2025 Priorities
      • EU Advocacy - 2024 Priorities
        • 2024 EU Elections
      • Previous groups/initiatives
      • Members & Observers
    • Working Group on UN Advocacy
      • The Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4)
        • GFMD statement to the Fourth Preparatory Committee Session
        • Advocacy Toolkit
        • Relevant Resources
      • WSIS+20 Review
      • Summit of the Future
    • Journalism Cloud Alliance Inaugural Meeting
      • Meeting agenda
      • Speakers
      • Literature Review
      • Press release
  • Policy meetings
    • 2025
      • GFMD Policy and Advocacy Meeting (April 2025)
        • Meeting Agenda
        • Key recommendations
      • GFMD Policy Meeting (March 2025)
        • Meeting agenda
        • Literature review
      • Connecting the dots: How to use existing mechanisms to protect media freedom online? (January 2025)
        • T&JM Final Case Digest
        • Meeting report
        • Meeting agenda
        • Literature review
    • 2024
      • Post-Summit of the Future Updates and Upcoming Opportunities (November 2024)
        • Meeting agenda
        • Literature review
    • 2023
      • Workshop on Encryption and Media Freedom (June '23)
        • Workshop Report
        • Resources
    • 2022
      • Gender Equality in Media Regulation (May '22)
        • Meeting Report
        • Literature Review
  • Resources
    • Advocacy for Funding: Key Messages, Data and Resources
    • Featured resources
    • Advocacy for Media and Journalism Funding
    • Internet Governance
      • 10 FAQs on Internet Governance
      • Internet Governance
        • Academic Studies
        • Policy papers & briefings
        • Handbooks & Guides
        • Articles
        • Research & Reports
      • Journalism & Media Development – Digital Media
        • Toolkits
        • Handbooks
        • Videos
        • Academic Studies
        • Books
        • Articles
        • Research & Reports
      • Digital Media Literacy
        • Articles
        • Handbooks & Manuals
        • Academic Studies
        • Reports
      • Media Sustainability & Digital Markets
        • Interviews, speeches, videos, and talks
        • Toolkits, Newsletter, Indexes, guides, tools, & courses
        • Academic Studies
        • Policy Papers & Briefings
        • Books
        • Articles
        • Research, handbooks & reports
      • Artificial Intelligence
        • Toolkits
        • Networks
        • Academic Studies
        • Policy Papers & Briefings
        • Articles
        • Videos
        • Research & Reports
      • Content-related resources
      • Data Protection & Privacy
        • Toolkits & Newsletters
        • Academic Studies
        • Policy Papers & Briefings
        • Articles
        • Research & Reports
      • Disinformation and Misinformation – Human Rights
        • Toolkits
        • Handbooks & Guides
        • Academic Studies
        • Policy Papers & Briefings
        • Articles
        • Research & Reports
      • Digital Violence & Security
        • Toolkits & Networks
        • Handbooks & Guides
        • Academic Studies
        • Policy Papers & Briefings
        • Articles
        • Research & Reports
        • Webinars
    • AI and Journalism
    • Public Access to Information – SDG 16.10
  • Articles and reports about US funding freeze
  • Policies and legislation
    • EU's Multiannual Financial Framework
    • Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act)
      • Official Documents
    • European Media Freedom Act (EMFA)
      • Official Documents
      • Briefing Breakfast on the European Media Freedom Act
      • Joint Letters, Policy Briefs and other resources
    • Global Digital Compact
    • Transparency and targeting of political advertising
      • Policy Briefs and other resources
    • Digital Markets Act (DMA)
      • DMA proposed activities 2021
    • Digital Services Act
      • Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Sing
      • Resources (DSA)
    • Rule of Law and Mechanisms
      • RoL proposed activities 2021
    • SLAPPs - Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation
      • SLAPPs proposed activities 2021
      • Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE)
      • Resources & Reports
    • UNESCO Guidelines
  • Actors
    • Institutions & Other Organisations
      • Access Now
      • Association for Progressive Communications (APC)
      • Council of Europe (CoE)
      • Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
      • DiploFoundation and GIP Digital Watch
      • Freedom House
      • GigaNET
      • Global Network Initiative (GNI)
      • Global Partners Digital (GPD)
      • ICANN
      • Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
      • International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA)
      • International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
      • Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
      • Internet Governance Caucus
      • Internet Governance Project
      • Internet Society (ISOC)
      • Media and Development Forum (FoME)
      • Mozilla
      • openDemocracy
      • Open Internet for Democracy
      • Ranking Digital Rights (RDR)
      • Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
      • Reuters Institute
      • UNESCO
      • Web Foundation
  • Advocacy & capacity building
  • Events and Training
    • Trainings and Capacity Building
      • Summer schools & courses
        • Indexes, guides, & tools
    • Conference & fora
    • Organisations & initiatives
  • ABOUT
    • GFMD Homepage
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  • Media Literacy and Internet Governance: A Necessary Marriage, Exemplified by the Case of the Belgian State Versus Facebook (Vrije Universiteit Brussels)
  • Media Literacy as a Core Competency for Engaged Citizenship in Participatory Democracy

Was this helpful?

  1. Resources
  2. Internet Governance
  3. Digital Media Literacy

Academic Studies

PreviousHandbooks & ManualsNextReports

Last updated 2 years ago

Was this helpful?

Media Literacy and Internet Governance: A Necessary Marriage, Exemplified by the Case of the Belgian State Versus Facebook ()

In recent years media literacy has gained in importance both in academic debates as in policy discussions. Several countries such as the UK, Finland, the Netherlands, Flanders/Belgium, have integrated media literacy into their media or/and educational policies. Multiple countries have set up new institutions or given older institutions the mandate to actively foster media literacy—e.g. respectively Ofcom (UK) and Mediawijzer.net (the Netherlands), Mediawijs.be (Flanders/Belgium). At the EU level Media Literacy has been integrated into the 2007 Audiovisual Media Service Directive. The Directive states that ‘(...) the development of media literacy in all sections of society should be promoted and its progress followed closely’ (European Commission, 2007). Whether the revision of the Directive in 2016 will result in a stronger focus on media literacy remains to be seen. At least the Paris Declaration on Promoting citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination through education —as a direct reaction to the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris—re-emphasizes the role of media literacy, in particular in ‘developing resistance to all forms of discrimination and indoctrination’ (Ministers of Education, 2015). At the international level UNESCO has rediscovered the importance of Media and Information Literacy. Under the banner of GAPMIL, the Global Alliance for Partnerships on Media and Information Literacy, it is driving new initiatives on different continents. The renewed interest in media literacy is the result of a couple of factors. First, the digitization of media and the advent of the Internet have lead to an abundance of choice in terms of content, which is much more difficult to navigate and assess. Second, the internet and social media more specifically have turned all users into potentially active producers of communication and content (Hoechsmann & Poyntz, 2012). Third, governments all over the world have largely deregulated media and increasingly rely on self-regulation and co-regulation by the media and on the Internet (Marsden, ...). The result of these evolution is that the individual is more and more expected to regulate it’s own use and that of other—often minor—members of his/her family. However, many user studies on Internet use, media use, online privacy, etc. show that not all users have the necessary skills and competences to self-regulate, hence the importance of media literacy. The shift from regulation by government to self-regulation by the individual sounds straightforward. However, this reasoning depends on two fundamental preconditions: 1) that all individuals obtain—with support of media literacy actions—the necessary capabilities to critically engage with media, 2) that the individual has the choice to act on the acquired knowledge. In this article we would like to argue that in the current internet environment this choice to act is often lacking. What is even more, a lack of transparency on how the internet and actors on the internet—such as Google, Facebook, LinkedIn— operate leads to a basic distrust about the use of technology and the use of the internet and digital media. This is certainly the case in relation to privacy. A lack of choice, transparency and trust currently has a couple of consequences: 1) media literacy at the internet level currently requires very high levels of internet and computer understanding, especially in relation to privacy protection, 2) it leads to funny and partially ineffective defense strategies such as covering webcams (very effective), using different browsers for trusted and untrusted websites (more questionable), etc., 3) a growing disinterest and disbelief in the possibility of self-regulation. A recent US study reveals that users who have high levels of understanding of online privacy, are more and more tempted to give up their privacy in the realization that they cannot protect themselves. This paper will further develop the argumentation presented above. It will apply this to the current case of the Flemish Privacy Commission versus Facebook in Belgium. (explain). What is clear is that in absence of genuine choice, transparency and trust media literacy becomes a fake proposition. Especially for those interpretations of media literacy that believe in the empowerment possibilities of the Internet.

Media Literacy as a Core Competency for in Participatory Democracy

The ubiquitous media landscape today is reshaping what it means to be an engaged citizen. Normative metrics for engagement—voting, attending town meetings, participation in civic groups—are eroding in the context of online advocacy, social protest, “liking,” sharing, and remixing. These new avenues for engagement offer vast opportunities for new and innovative approaches to teaching and learning about political engagement in the context of new media platforms and technologies. This article explores digital media literacy as a core competency for engaged citizenship in participatory democracy. It combines new models of engaged and citizenship and participatory politics with frameworks for digital and media literacy education, to develop a framework for media literacy as a core political competency for active, engaged, and participatory citizenship.

Vrije Universiteit Brussels
Engaged Citizenship