Methodology 2025+
A revised, database-driven framework for mapping the political, economic and technological forces that shape journalism and the contemporary information environment.
From media systems to information systems
MIM was launched in 2017 around narrative country research on regulation, funding and technology. The information environment has since become much more complex: platforms, AI companies, cloud providers, telecom operators, advertising technologies, data infrastructures and transnational regulators now exercise forms of power that cannot be adequately captured by a static media-sector report.
The original strength
The legacy framework combined local expertise, interviews, policy analysis, company evidence and qualitative assessment. It made visible the structural pressures surrounding journalism rather than treating threats to media independence as isolated events.
What the 2025+ framework adds
The current methodology converts those analytical strengths into a structured research system that can be updated, compared and queried across countries and over time.
Three pillars of information power
The 2025+ framework preserves the conceptual continuity of MIM while expanding the actors and relationships that researchers map. Each pillar contains standardised entities, variables and evidence requirements.
Regulation & Policy Influence
Maps institutions and actors that create, enforce, shape or influence the rules governing the information environment.
- regulatory authorities
- policy decision-makers
- internal and external influencers
- decision-making transparency
- enforcement actions and institutional independence
Provenance & Funding
Maps the ownership, control, financial structures and funding flows behind media and information actors.
- media and information companies
- beneficial owners and controllers
- government and non-government funders
- revenue, profit and audience trends
- cross-sector and political relationships
Technology, AI & Infrastructure
Maps the technological systems and companies that structure access, visibility, distribution and monetisation.
- platform and AI companies
- telecom, cloud, CDN and infrastructure providers
- algorithms and data flows
- technology–government relations
- technology–journalism dependencies
What researchers collect
The framework is intentionally detailed. The accordions below preserve the main data categories while keeping the methodology readable for users who do not need every variable at once.
1.1 Regulatory Authorities
Institutions with authority over any part of the information sphere, including broadcast, print, online-content, data-protection, competition, telecom, cybersecurity, election, advertising and AI/algorithm governance bodies.
Institutional structure
- legal mandate and regulatory domain
- tasks, powers and jurisdiction
- governance and board composition
- appointment and dismissal rules
- five-year budget and funding sources
Influence & accountability
- transparency requirements
- independence safeguards
- access-to-data obligations
- controversies or political influence
- significant enforcement actions and decisions
1.2 Policy Decision-Makers
Individuals who directly or indirectly shape media, technology and information policy, including ministers, regulator chairs, parliamentary committee leaders, senior civil servants and executive advisers.
Profile
- current role and institution
- career background
- past affiliations
- political ties
Influence
- policy areas
- documented policy impact
- industry relationships
- political or foreign links
1.3 Internal & External Influencers
Domestic and foreign actors that influence regulation or policy outcomes, including companies, trade bodies, civil society, academics, donors, international organisations, foreign governments and influential individuals.
Actor profile
- actor type and sector
- funding sources
- areas of influence
Influence mechanisms
- advocacy and lobbying
- litigation
- political alliances
- campaigns and documented interventions
1.4 Decision-Making Transparency
Tracks whether regulatory and policy processes are open, documentable and contestable.
Transparency evidence
- published decisions, agendas and minutes
- public consultation mechanisms
- availability of filings and datasets
Accountability evidence
- transparency laws
- opaque/discretionary decision patterns
- access to sanctions, budgets and procurement records
2.1 Media & Information Companies
Broadcasters, publishers, online outlets, news agencies, fact-checking organisations and hybrid digital actors producing or distributing news and public information.
Corporate & financial
- direct and beneficial ownership
- shareholding chains
- revenue structure
- five-year profit/loss series
- cross-sector holdings
Market & editorial
- audience reach and market share
- editorial orientation/positioning
- political or ideological alignment history
- AI integration in production
2.2 Owners & Beneficial Controllers
Individuals and institutions that exercise ownership or control over information actors.
Ownership
- beneficial owners
- controlling shareholders
- wealth origin and business background
- cross-sector and cross-border holdings
Influence
- political affiliations and activities
- lobbying and political finance
- public contracting
- controversies, sanctions and legal issues
2.3 Funders of the Information Sphere
Governmental and non-governmental funding actors, including advertisers, corporations, philanthropy, political parties, donors, state advertising, subsidies, grants and public-service financing.
Funding flows
- five-year annual-spending series
- funding mechanisms
- top recipients
- allocation criteria
Influence assessment
- patterns of favouritism
- political use of funding
- links to editorial outcomes
- agenda-setting effects
3.1 Technology & Infrastructure Actors
AI companies, platforms, telecoms, cloud providers, data brokers, ad-tech companies, cybersecurity companies, device/OS operators, CDNs and secure-communications infrastructure.
Company & market
- services and ecosystem role
- AI capabilities and data dependencies
- market penetration and user numbers
- local operations, offices and data centres
- ownership and funding
Public-interest impact
- regulatory compliance history
- public procurement and national-security roles
- impact on news visibility
- impact on news monetisation
3.2 Algorithms, Data Flows & Distribution
Examines how information is ranked, recommended, filtered, transmitted and monetised.
Distribution infrastructure
- recommendation/ranking systems
- cross-border data flows
- interoperability conditions
- platform API access
Observable effects
- visibility changes affecting outlets
- data-localisation/transfer requirements
- documented suppression or amplification
3.3 Technology–Government Relations
Tracks interaction between technology companies and public authorities.
Government interaction
- content-removal requests
- data-access and surveillance requests
- public procurement and partnerships
Regulation & influence
- compliance and enforcement
- political lobbying
- ownership/financial ties
- AI and digital-services transparency
3.4 Technology–Journalism Relations
Tracks dependencies between journalism and technology systems.
Distribution & monetisation
- platform-referral traffic
- monetisation dependencies
- algorithm-change effects
- grants, subsidies and platform programmes
Editorial environment
- tech/media ownership links
- AI adoption in newsrooms
- content labelling
- zero-rating and API restrictions
The MIM data model
Country research is organised around entities and relationships rather than chapters alone. This makes it possible to connect people, companies, regulators, funding flows and technological dependencies and to compare them across countries and time.
Core entities
Design principles
Methodology handbook & data templates
The framework is operationalised through common research templates so country teams collect information in the same structure. The handbook explains the methodology; the spreadsheet provides the working data-collection architecture.
Legacy framework and current framework
The 2025+ methodology is an evolution rather than a repudiation of the original MIM. The same central concern — how power shapes journalism and public information — is now represented through a different research architecture.
Narrative comparative reports
Country teams used a shared research template, desk research, interviews, regulatory and company documents, and qualitative analysis to produce substantial country reports structured around Regulation, Funding and Technology.
Read the legacy methodology →Structured country datasets
The current model retains the three pillars while introducing standard entities, variables, time series and relationships designed for continuous updating, comparison and future data visualisation.
Explore current MIM country research →Interoperable data, distinct projects
MIM and GMFM can share corporate, ownership and financial evidence where useful, particularly within the Provenance & Funding pillar. But GMFM is a standalone MJRC project with its own methodology, company registries and financial-intelligence purpose. MIM uses that evidence as one layer in a broader analysis of information power; GMFM focuses on the companies themselves.
A methodology designed to evolve
The information environment continues to change rapidly. Versioning makes methodological changes explicit while preserving comparability and the historical record of how MIM research has been produced.
MIM Methodology 2025+, v1.0 · Publisher: Media and Journalism Research Center (MJRC)
Media and Journalism Research Center (2025). Media Influence Matrix – Methodology 2025+: AI-Era, Database-Driven Framework. MJRC.
This page explains the framework now guiding new MIM research. Existing MIM reports remain governed by the methodology under which they were originally produced.