@article{cohen_knowers_2026,

title = {Knowers and others: Indigenous representation in search (and answer) engines},

author = {Tegan Cohen},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1329878X261484730},

doi = {10.1177/1329878X261484730},

issn = {1329-878X, 2200-467X},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-09-01},

urldate = {2026-09-10},

journal = {Media International Australia},

pages = {1329878X261484730},

abstract = {Aboriginal knowers and knowledges have historically been sidelined in accounts of ‘authoritative’ information about us across a range of knowledge institutions. This epistemic exclusion catalysed struggles to self-represent and counter dominant images and stories, critically reread histories, and reframe the way issues that concern us are understood and discussed. Google is a powerful epistemic actor. Through design choices, Google can facilitate self-representation or reinforce the authority claimed by others to represent Aboriginal peoples. The integration of large language models into search systems is reshaping how users encounter and engage with information online, raising urgent questions about online visibility and representation. What representations are prioritised in Google's direct answers? Which knowers are treated as authoritative? What does this mean for Indigenous representation? This paper contributes to the empirical basis for reflection on these critical questions with a case study of Google AI overviews. Using thematic and close textual analysis of a corpus of question-direct answer pairs, the study offers insights into how AI overviews reinforce or accommodate challenges to dominant discourses, and more generally how ubiquitous, everyday applications of AI are affecting Aboriginal self-representation. The article argues that the shift to AI-generated search results severs links between knowers, knowledge and context in different and subtle ways, with serious implications for Indigenous representation, rereading and reframing.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{kasianenko_searching_2026,

title = {Searching for the truth? search engines and their AI affordances’ responses to conspiratorial search practices},

author = {Kateryna Kasianenko and Caroline Gardam and Katherine M. FitzGerald and Ashwin Nagappa and Axel Bruns and Shir Weinbrand and Daniel Angus and Samantha Vilkins and Abdul Karim Obeid},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1329878X261481856},

doi = {10.1177/1329878X261481856},

issn = {1329-878X, 2200-467X},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-09-01},

urldate = {2026-09-03},

journal = {Media International Australia},

pages = {1329878X261481856},

abstract = {Search engines are a common pathway to conspiracy theories, and producers of conspiratorial narratives actively encourage users to search for particular terms. Understanding how search engines respond to different information-seeking practices is therefore essential for explaining the dynamics of online conspiracy theories. Existing audits of search engines rarely account for systematic variation in query formulation arising from users’ differing levels of engagement with conspiratorial beliefs, nor do they consider recently introduced AI-powered search features. To address this gap, we developed search query sets informed by conspiratorial and non-conspiratorial information-seeking practices of online forums, using the chemtrails and 15-minute cities conspiracy theories as case studies. We performed algorithmic audits of Google's first-page search results and AI Overview responses. Our findings show substantial differences in the information returned for queries representative of general public information seeking compared with those reflecting conspiratorial perspectives. These differences appear to arise partly from Google's efforts to moderate sensitive topics, but also from the limitations of those interventions in recognising and responding to conspiratorial modes of query formulation. AI Overviews likewise vary according to query framing and generally attempt to debunk conspiratorial claims. However, these responses are often brief, provide limited supporting evidence, and are less effective for the newer 15-minute cities conspiracy theory, suggesting that current AI-mediated search guardrails remain uneven and require further development.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{chesher_mobile_2026,

title = {Mobile AI Service Robots and Everyday Politics of Space},

author = {Chris Chesher and Justine Humphry},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20501579261476544},

doi = {10.1177/20501579261476544},

issn = {2050-1579, 2050-1587},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-08-01},

urldate = {2026-08-25},

journal = {Mobile Media \& Communication},

pages = {20501579261476544},

abstract = {This article examines the rise of a new generation of mobile service robots that use AI for navigation and communication in public and semipublic spaces. Reviewing the state of the field of service robots and robot scholarship, this paper is a literature-informed commentary on mobile AI service robots as mobile media and their implications for human workers and the public, shared environments, and regulation in everyday spaces. We examine how mobile AI service robots are increasingly appearing in restaurants, hotels, university campuses, and public streets as service workers, tools, and social actors, introducing new modalities of communication, and reshaping spatial relationships, labour practices and power dynamics. These developments raise critical questions about the effect of robots’ communicative acts of movement, interfacing and emotional expression on others, the organisation of labour, and their role in the privatisation and surveillance of space. Ultimately, we argue that as mobile AI becomes embedded in ordinary life and work settings, it necessitates a renewed focus on who benefits, who is displaced, and how these increasingly agentic actors are governed as they become normalised in shared and public spaces.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{sparrow_slaves_2026,

title = {Slaves to the algorithms? Algocracy and republican liberty},

author = {Robert Sparrow},

url = {https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43681-026-01171-7},

doi = {10.1007/s43681-026-01171-7},

issn = {2730-5953, 2730-5961},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-08-01},

urldate = {2026-08-25},

journal = {AI and Ethics},

volume = {6},

number = {4},

pages = {374},

abstract = {Abstract 

 Increasingly, governments are relying on artificial intelligence to make, or inform, important decisions\textemdasha phenomenon that John Danaher has styled, “algocracy”. Republicanism implies that there are at least four different reasons to be concerned about algocracy. First, decisions made using AI will often be impossible for citizens to contest because the reasons for the decisions will be inscrutable, which calls into question the legitimacy of these decisions. Second, the inability of citizens to contest the outcomes of government decisions made using AI and/or the justification for the use of AI will render these arbitrary and inimical to liberty on a republican account. Third, overreliance on AI is likely to undermine civic virtues that are necessary to the defence of liberty. Fourth, AI is such a powerful technology that it may free governments from any fear of revolution. If we wish to benefit from the use of AI in government without sacrificing liberty, we must: ensure that decisions made by AI can be publicly contested; investigate ways to mitigate the impact of algocracy on the political culture of democracies; and resist the temptation to develop AI for applications that would grant governments too much power over their citizens.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{kuai_great_2026,

title = {The Great Wall of the Press: Layered Boundary Work of AI-Integrated Journalism},

author = {Joanne Kuai and Michael Karlsson},

url = {https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/12504},

doi = {10.17645/mac.12504},

issn = {2183-2439},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-08-01},

urldate = {2026-08-21},

journal = {Media and Communication},

volume = {14},

pages = {12504},

abstract = {As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly embedded in journalistic practice, debates often frame it as either a disruptive force or a tool for efficiency. This study moves beyond this dichotomy by examining how journalists themselves interpret, negotiate, and position AI within journalism. Drawing on 19 in-depth interviews with Chinese journalists, and informed by boundary work and boundary object perspectives, the study analyses how AI is selectively integrated, justified, and governed across journalistic processes. The findings show that AI is primarily confined to routine and low-risk tasks, while being excluded from core editorial functions involving judgement, meaning-making, and accountability. The study argues that AI intensifies journalistic boundary work because it challenges journalism not only operationally, but also epistemically and infrastructurally. Journalists therefore engage in layered forms of boundary negotiation that operate across task, discursive, and structural dimensions. At the same time, AI functions as a boundary object mediating relationships among journalists, technology companies, and governance institutions under conditions of asymmetric platform dependency and institutional control.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{catherine_rose_stimming_2026,

title = {Stimming and support assemblages: autistic improvisation, sensory worlds and wellbeing},

author = {Megan Catherine Rose and Deborah Lupton},

url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09687599.2026.2715012},

doi = {10.1080/09687599.2026.2715012},

issn = {0968-7599, 1360-0508},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-08-01},

urldate = {2026-08-21},

journal = {Disability \& Society},

pages = {1\textendash25},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{tang_behind_2026,

title = {Behind the “AI slop”: exploring the AI-generated viral short video production in China},

author = {Jiaru Tang and Xiaoting Yu and Patrik Wikstr\"{o}m and Kylie Pappalardo},

url = {https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00146-026-03254-9},

doi = {10.1007/s00146-026-03254-9},

issn = {0951-5666, 1435-5655},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-08-01},

urldate = {2026-08-19},

journal = {AI \& SOCIETY},

abstract = {Abstract 

 As generative AI becomes embedded in platform-based cultural production, new forms of creative labour are emerging that challenge established understandings of what it means to be a “creator.” This article examines AI slop creators in China, a group that uses generative tools to benchmark viral content, test formats, operate matrix account systems, and formalise production, transforming virality from an unpredictable outcome into an object of systematic management. Drawing on ethnographic research conducted between 2023 and 2025 in China, this study shows AI enables a cohort of “Internet entrepreneurs” to enter cultural production, driven by a “money hustling culture” that encourages formerly idle and low-skilled individuals to pursue rapid monetisation. The findings suggest that AI slop creators organise production less around authorship, identity and aspiration, and more around operational mastery, strategic disposability, and algorithmic opportunism. Rather than cultivating personal brands, they prioritise speed, scale and adaptability, pointing toward a post-creator mode of cultural labour in contemporary platform economies.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{andrejevic_critical_2026,

title = {The critical conscience of cultural studies},

author = {Mark Andrejevic},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1329878X261456769},

doi = {10.1177/1329878X261456769},

issn = {1329-878X, 2200-467X},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-07-01},

urldate = {2026-09-10},

journal = {Media International Australia},

volume = {200},

number = {1},

pages = {15\textendash20},

abstract = {To suggest that, for those influenced by his work, Graeme modeled the critical conscience of cultural studies is to highlight these key themes in his approach: the relation of theory to meaningful practice, an abiding concern with the power relations that shape everyday life, the intellectual, ethical-moral, and civic role of higher education, and, above all, a contribution to the public good. His contributions are monumental and remain an inspiration to those who share his version of cultural studies and its commitments. There is much work still to do, but we are all better off\textemdashand profoundly grateful\textemdashfor having been fortunate enough to share the place with him for a while.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{kasianenko_foregrounding_2026,

title = {Foregrounding user agency in digital discourse studies},

author = {Kateryna Kasianenko},

url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17447143.2026.2708291},

doi = {10.1080/17447143.2026.2708291},

issn = {1744-7143, 1747-6615},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-07-01},

urldate = {2026-07-31},

journal = {Journal of Multicultural Discourses},

pages = {1\textendash7},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{mamaev_building_2026,

title = {Building National Research Infrastructure for Digital Platform Observability at Scale},

author = {Bogdan Mamaev and Daniel Angus and Amanda Lawrence and Richard Sinnott},

url = {https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/12090},

doi = {10.17645/mac.12090},

issn = {2183-2439},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-07-01},

urldate = {2026-07-30},

journal = {Media and Communication},

volume = {14},

pages = {12090},

abstract = {Digital platforms have fundamentally transformed public communication, yet the capacity to study them is increasingly threatened by restricted data access, opaque algorithmic architectures, and complex legal barriers. Addressing these challenges requires a paradigm shift from isolated, project-based solutions toward shared, national-scale research infrastructures. We present the Australian Internet Observatory (AIO) as a case study of a multi-year initiative designed to facilitate digital media platform observability at scale. The AIO integrates access to computational resources, data governance frameworks, and diverse data sourcing methods, ranging from platform-centric API-harvesting to user-focused data donations. The AIO addresses methodological challenges, ethics, the technical skills gap, and the complexities of regulatory compliance. We argue that shared infrastructures function as vital institutional interventions to ensure independent, reproducible, and ethical digital media research in a continuously evolving media environment},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{boichak_playful_2026,

title = {Playful digital citizenship in wartime: Civic practices and algorithmic imaginaries in the North Atlantic Fella Organization},

author = {Olga Boichak and Kateryna Kasianenko},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14614448261445078},

doi = {10.1177/14614448261445078},

issn = {1461-4448, 1461-7315},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-07-01},

urldate = {2026-07-09},

journal = {New Media \& Society},

volume = {28},

number = {7},

pages = {3004\textendash3028},

abstract = {This article articulates strategies citizens engage in to reclaim their agency in an increasingly fragmented and unmoderated algorithmic public sphere. Drawing on the case of the North Atlantic Fella Organization (NAFO), we demonstrate how playful, 

 allegorithmic 

 civic practices constitute a participatory response to disinformation at the backdrop of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Capitalising on their algorithmic literacy, algorithmic resistance, and algorithmic becoming, 

 allegorithmic citizens 

 may find alternative ways to challenge the status quo in wartime, mobilising resources to support communities in crisis when traditional governance mechanisms fail. With the growing interest in harms from online humour and memes in democratic societies, NAFO’s playful reclaiming of the notions of algorithm extends understanding of civic participatory practices. But on a more fundamental level, these 

 allegorithmic 

 citizenship acts foster social cohesion and solidarity among social media users who question the ethical responsibilities that come with witnessing a distant war unfold on their feed.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{wilken_when_2026,

title = {When Maps Make Decisions: Mobile AI, Navigation Apps, and the Mobilization of Mobile Data},

author = {Rowan Wilken and Julian Thomas},

url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20501579261465218},

doi = {10.1177/20501579261465218},

issn = {2050-1579, 2050-1587},

year  = {2026},

date = {2026-07-01},

urldate = {2026-07-09},

journal = {Mobile Media \& Communication},

pages = {20501579261465218},

abstract = {Contemporary maps are creatures of “mobile AI,” the linkage of machine learning with communication and mobility, which we now think of as a significant “next phase” of digital communication. In this article, we address this AI-driven “next phase” by examining the current AI-facilitated developments that are reshaping mobile maps and navigational apps. We consider how AI tools are changing the maps that we have (how maps are made), how we interact with mobile maps and navigation services (how maps are used), and their purposes (what maps are doing). By analyzing mobile maps at the intersection of geospatial artificial intelligence (GeoAI), platformization, and mobile AI, this article shows how the automation of navigation reorganizes everyday mobility, redistributes decision-making, and generates new political, economic, and social questions. Mobile maps offer a particularly revealing case for understanding how AI is being embedded into mobile media, how value is extracted from movement, and how infrastructural decisions are increasingly delegated to platform systems.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}