Media Regulation in The Digital Age: A Comparative Analysis of Nigeria and Bangladesh

References

[1] Abubakar, A. (2020). Media regulation and democratic governance in Nigeria. Journal of AfricanMedia Studies, 12(3), 421–437. https://doi.org/10.1386/jams_00025_1

[2] Freedom House. (2022). Freedom on the Net 2022: Nigeria and Bangladesh country reports. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2022

[3] Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the HiddenDecisions That Shape Social Media. Yale University Press.

[4] Gorwa, R. (2019). The platform governance triangle: Conceptualizing the informal regulation ofonline content. Internet Policy Review, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.2.1398

[5] Haque, M. (2021). Digital authoritarianism in Bangladesh: The impact of the Digital Security Act2018 on free speech. Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 6(4), 450–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/20578911211027418

[6] Ibrahim, J. (2020). Social media, elections, and democratic consolidation in Nigeria. AfricanJournal of Democracy and Governance, 7(1), 65–82.

[7] Iwuoha, V. C., & Ezeibe, C. C. (2021). Social media, fake news, and Nigeria’s struggle for democracy. Social media + Society, 7(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211019098

[8] Khan, A. (2022). Freedom of expression under siege in Bangladesh: An assessment of the DigitalSecurity Act. Journal of South Asian Development, 17(2), 133–151.https://doi.org/10.1177/09731741221105675

[9] Leerssen, P. (2020). The soapbox as a black box: Regulating transparency in social media recommender systems. European Journal of Law and Technology, 11(2).

[10] Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative politics and the comparative method. American Political ScienceReview, 65(3), 682–693. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955513

[11] Mwakalombe, G. (2021). Comparative perspectives on digital media regulation in Africa and Asia.Journal of Information Policy, 11(1), 120–140. https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0120

[12] Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.).Pearson.

[13] Ojebode, A., Adedoyin, T., & Ojo, T. (2021). State power and digital dissent: The #EndSARSmovement in Nigeria. African Affairs, 120(481), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adab015

[14] Rahman, M. (2020). Press freedom in Bangladesh: Navigating censorship and control. Media Asia,47(2–3), 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/01296612.2020.1829043

[15] Rahman, M., & Ahmed, S. (2021). Fake news and elections in Bangladesh: Challenges and implications. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 18(2), 178–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2021.1910753

[16] Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SagePublications.

@article{1722780,
      author = {Abubakar Umar Gachi, Maryam Eti Shehu, Joseph Ojomugbo Bala, Mohammed Musa Saleh, Musa Garba Baba},
      title = {Media Regulation in The Digital Age: A Comparative Analysis of Nigeria and Bangladesh},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {3},
      pages = {332-341},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1722780.pdf},
      abstract = {This study examines the difficulties of policing free speech in the internet era by contrasting Bangladesh and Nigeria. As lower-middle-income democracies with active online populations, both countries are increasingly concerned about digital dissent, hate speech, and disinformation. To investigate three main themes (1) ambiguous and punitive legal frameworks, (2) misinformation as a rationale for censorship, and (3) surveillance and platform governance—the study employs a qualitative comparative case study methodology and consults legal texts, civil society reports, and secondary literature. The results show that the wording of Bangladesh's Digital Security Act (2018) and Nigeria's Cybercrimes Act (2015) is unclear, allowing for selective enforcement against people, journalists, and activists. The study concludes that while regulation of digital harms is necessary, the current approaches in Nigeria and Bangladesh prioritize state control over fundamental freedoms, undermining democratic values. Despite these challenges, opportunities for reform are emerging. Civil society organizations, judicial interventions, and international human rights advocacy continue to push for greater accountability, transparent platform governance, and alignment of national laws with global standards. While disinformation is a real threat during elections and protests, governments in both contexts frequently weaponize it to suppress opposition rather than promote transparency. Additionally, surveillance regimes and opaque partnerships with global technology platforms further erode user rights and civic trust. Maintaining democratic governance in the digital age requires a rights-based framework that strikes a balance between security considerations and freedom of speech.},
      keywords = {Media, Regulation, Digital Age, Security.},
      month = {September},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I3-1722780}
  }