by Bessie Slagt and Sophie Duvekot, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Today’s digital information society is evolving rapidly. New journalistic platforms are emerging, technologies are developing at high speed, and citizens themselves are creating and sharing news. Digital communication has created new opportunities for engagement, but has also brought about challenges such as hate speech and the spread of disinformation. These developments influence how citizens, media and public institutions interact.
In the DIACOMET research project, funded by the Horizon Europe programme, we want to find out how citizens, media and public institutions can be enabled to communicate with each other in a responsible and ethical way. Researchers in eight European countries – Austria, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Slovenia and Switzerland – are working together to explore the question of what constitutes ‘good communication conduct ’ at a time when deeper ethical tensions are reshaping the foundations of journalism and public communication.
Launched in 2023, the project runs until June 2026. As we reach the final phase, we are sharing some of the first results with you and discussing some key insights from the Netherlands, the context we focus on as researchers from the University of Applied Sciences Utrecht.
What we’ve learned from existing ethical codes
Together with the seven other countries involved in this project, we began with a document analysis of 429 existing codes and guidelines for public communication. Until today, research on journalistic codes of ethics has mostly focused on general documents at the professional level. Our project provides a database of codes of ethics and guidelines for all kinds of public communication, from journalists and PR professionals to advertisers and media users.
Many documents mention dialogue and participation, but they rarely provide clear guidance on how to make communication inclusive and meaningful. They tend to focus on operational tasks, such as comment moderation or community management, rather than on fostering inclusive dialogue among citizens, media and public institutions.
How citizens experience public communication
Between April 2024 and March 2025, we spoke with over 65 citizens in the Netherlands in ten group discussions to understand how they experience public communication and how they try to influence it.
Citizens told us that they rely on a wide range of sources to stay informed: from national news and civil society organisations to social media and personal networks. Each of these information sources plays a distinct role. National news is considered reliable but often too generic; civic organisations are valued for their contextual depth; social media allows for interaction but is also experienced as hostile, and personal networks provide trust and emotional support.
Even with this broad mix of sources, citizens face challenges that make it difficult to stay well-informed about public issues. They shared that information is not always accessible, with essential information circulating only “off the record” or through personal networks. Media coverage is perceived as too superficial to make sense of complex issues. Many participants also felt that their own voices and lived experiences are not properly represented by the media and other public institutions. Communication from Dutch government bodies is further described as distant and impersonal, lacking the empathy people seek.
Taken together, these challenges mean that people who want to be informed often struggle to do so. Their efforts are hindered not by a lack of interest but by barriers that prevent their needs from being met. As a result, some citizens withdraw from public debate, while others actively take initiative by creating their own channels, mobilising networks, or pressing institutions to respond.
Learning from experts
As part of the DIACOMET project, we also spoke with experts from various fields – education, communication, media, technology and regulation – across the eight European countries. Using a structured procedure called the Delphi method, 179 experts shared their insights on how public communication can become more ethical and inclusive.
They highlighted familiar challenges: online discussions are often polarised and hostile, communication from institutions feels distant, and citizens’ voices are not always heard. Experts stressed the need for transparent use of AI, better regulation of digital platforms and stronger media literacy. They also emphasised the importance of creating inclusive spaces where citizens can meaningfully participate in public communication and see their input make a difference.
In the final phase of the project, we will work together with citizens and experts to turn the project’s insights into practical tools and guidelines that help citizens, media, and institutions communicate in a more responsible and ethical way.
Bessie Slagt, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, the Netherlands
Sophie Duvekot, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, the Netherlands
