From platform outrage to institutional consequence: Convergent hybrid media accountability in Morocco

This article develops the concept of convergent hybrid media accountability (CHMA) to explain how informal digital criticism is translated into institutional consequence in Morocco’s hybrid media environment. Moving beyond the view of accountability as an internal professional virtue, the article argues that where formal bodies are fragile or distrusted, citizens use platformed publics to initiate scrutiny from outside media institutions. Drawing on a pragmatist mixed-methods design – combining a survey of 205 social media users, eight semi-structured interviews with journalists and editors, and process tracing of nine accountability episodes (2022–2025) – the study finds that online outrage only matters when it crosses a threshold of convergence . This bridging moment occurs when informal claims gain legitimacy and procedural uptake through two linked mechanisms – amplification and legitimation, then escalation and formalisation. Findings reveal an empowerment paradox : the most active users report high efficacy but also perceive strong institutional resistance. The article concludes that platform acceleration and emerging digital-content regulations have intensified both the speed and selectivity of accountability in Morocco. Ultimately, this study offers CHMA as a de-Westernising, potentially transferable framework for analysing how media accountability operates in hybrid media environments characterised by media pluralism and managed political asymmetry.