Algorithmic gatewatching and its implications

This response to the article ‘Conceptualising the “Algorithmic Public Opinion”: Public Opinion Formation in the Digital Age’ by Alessandro Gandini, Silvia Keeling, and Urbano Reviglio considers the concept of algorithmic public opinion and highlights that while the algorithms of digital and social media platforms and associated information and communication infrastructures now exert a substantial influence on how public opinion formation unfolds (the process) and what public opinion patterns emerge as a result (the product), these algorithms are by no means the sole determinant of process and product. It argues instead that the ordinary users of these platforms – and they are active users of these communicative spaces, not just passive ‘audiences’ for the communicative efforts of others – retain significantly more agency than this article's discussion affords them.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Dialogues on Digital Society
Published
2025-04-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/29768640251336597
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.73

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Algorithmic gatewatching and its implications

Axel Bruns
2 citations
Dialogues on Digital Society
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
4.73
article

Algorithmic gatewatching and its implications

Axel Bruns
article en
2 citations

Abstract

This response to the article ‘Conceptualising the “Algorithmic Public Opinion”: Public Opinion Formation in the Digital Age’ by Alessandro Gandini, Silvia Keeling, and Urbano Reviglio considers the concept of algorithmic public opinion and highlights that while the algorithms of digital and social media platforms and associated information and communication infrastructures now exert a substantial influence on how public opinion formation unfolds (the process) and what public opinion patterns emerge as a result (the product), these algorithms are by no means the sole determinant of process and product. It argues instead that the ordinary users of these platforms – and they are active users of these communicative spaces, not just passive ‘audiences’ for the communicative efforts of others – retain significantly more agency than this article's discussion affords them.

Dialogues on Digital Society
Queensland University of Technology (AU)
Australian Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
4.73
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.