South Africa faced a similar problem when a major media conglomerate increased its influence over national newspapers. Researchers found that critical reporting about mining companies went down, even though mining was one of the most important political and economic issues in the country. Many of these mining companies had ties to the media owners, so stories that challenged them were pushed aside.

All of these cases raise the same question. How independent can information be when the people who own the platforms also have major financial and political interests in what gets reported?

State Influence and the Politics of Information Control

Corporate control is only one part of the story. Governments also shape the information environment in powerful ways. Scholars argue that states influence media through regulation, licensing, legal pressure, criminal charges, and control over digital infrastructures.

China is the most widely studied example of state control. The Great Firewall is a combination of filtering, monitoring, and content manipulation that limits what people can see online. Political scientist Margaret Roberts describes this system as censorship through friction. Instead of removing everything outright, the government makes certain information harder to access or slower to load. Her research shows that people stop searching for sensitive topics simply because the effort becomes frustrating. The result is that censorship works even when people do not realize it is happening.

Russia uses a different approach. Independent journalists face pressure through laws, fines, and arrests. During the invasion of Ukraine, the government passed laws that made it illegal to call the conflict a war. Within a few weeks, media freedom organizations reported that most independent outlets had either shut down, fled the country, or been blocked. State-controlled television became the main source of news for most citizens, which shaped how the public understood the conflict.

Turkey has imprisoned more journalists in the last decade than most countries. Media scholars argue that many news outlets now mirror government messaging simply to avoid retaliation. Licensing rules, fines, and advertising pressure all work together to limit what journalists feel safe covering.

Hungary shows how this can happen inside the European Union. Researchers have documented how the Hungarian government gradually increased its influence over media through regulatory changes, the purchase of outlets by government-connected business groups, and the strategic placement of state advertising. Within a few years, independent journalism became financially impossible for many outlets.

These cases show that governments do not need to ban information outright for control to be effective. They can use legal threats, financial pressure, and regulatory decisions to shape what appears in the news.

Digital Platforms and Algorithmic Power

Even when traditional media is limited, people often assume that the internet offers an alternative. But digital platforms have become powerful gatekeepers in their own way. They decide what appears on users’ screens through algorithms that reward engagement and advertising revenue.

A study that analyzed more than five hundred million news events found that algorithms strongly influence which political issues gain attention. Scholars call this algorithmic gatekeeping. Unlike editors, algorithms do not explain their decisions. They promote content that keeps people on the platform, which often means sensational or emotionally charged posts rise to the top while complex or nuanced information disappears.

Governments have learned to use these systems to their advantage. During the 2023 protests in Iran, the state restricted internet access in several regions to limit the spread of videos and information. India used local internet shutdowns during elections and protests more frequently than any other democracy in recent years. Myanmar’s military used Facebook to spread propaganda against the Rohingya minority, something Meta later confirmed in its own investigations.

The Guardian/Website

Kenya experienced a different version of this problem during its elections. Political consultants used digital advertisements and coordinated misinformation campaigns to influence voters. Scholars described this as outsourced propaganda, where private firms became the main actors shaping public opinion. Digital platforms are not neutral information spaces. They are private businesses with their own priorities, and their decisions influence how entire societies understand political and social issues.

Selective Reporting and the Politics of Silence

Media control is also about what gets ignored. Some crises receive constant attention while others barely appear in mainstream coverage. Conflicts in Yemen, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo receive limited attention compared to conflicts involving powerful countries. Researchers refer to this as structural silence. Issues involving marginalized populations only gain coverage when they align with the interests of wealthy nations.

Indigenous struggles, gender based violence, and climate displacement often receive minimal reporting in national news systems. Studies show that marginalized communities tend to appear only when framed through crime or crisis. This shapes public opinion in ways that reinforce existing inequalities.

Omission is a form of control. It decides whose stories matter enough to be told.

Why It Matters

I am not arguing that all journalism is corrupt or that every reporter is compromised. I am arguing that media systems across the world are shaped by power. What people learn, question, or believe is influenced by institutions that do not always act in the public’s best interest.

Media literacy is not about assuming everything is a lie. It is about understanding that information is never neutral. It is always shaped by the interests of those who produce it, fund it, own it, regulate it, or distribute it.

The question is not whether the media is influenced by power. The question is whether the public recognizes how that influence works, and whether we are willing to question the information we receive instead of accepting it as complete.