Digital journalism: 25 years of research. Review article // Periodismo digital: 25 años de investigación. Artículo de revisión
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1994, the first web online media outlets were introduced in several countries around the world. Twenty-five years later, digital or online journalism is a confirmed reality and common practice in professional and academic circles. Based on an extensive bibliographic review, this article examines the main areas of academic research related to digital media at the global level in the last quarter of a century. It shows the lines of research on the history of journalism on the Internet, the forms of digital media, their languages and economic challenges. It also reviews the most widespread research theories and methods. The analysis confirms that research on digital journalism is a strong, ongoing discipline, despite the fact that several methodological and thematic challenges will need to be addressed in the next few years.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".