How is cybersecurity discussed across media channels? Exploratory analyses of Twitter content and news reporting

2Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

As digitalization and the increasing connectivity of devices continue to shape everyday life, cybersecurity is becoming increasingly critical. However, many citizens feel unable to take even basic protective measures against cyber threats. Understanding how cybersecurity is discussed in public discourse and how this discourse can be improved is therefore essential. Risk communication research has paid limited attention to this issue. This study adopts a cross-platform approach, combining an exploratory computational analysis of Twitter (X) content with a theory-driven manual content analysis of reports from leading German news outlets. The dataset includes 242,715 tweets and 574 news articles. For the manual content analysis, the study uses Protection Motivation Theory. Our findings offer novel insights into the public discourse on cybersecurity in Germany. On Twitter (X), data security and data protection emerge as dominant topics, with cybersecurity experts being the most influential voices. The news media analysis reveals a tendency to emphasize cyber threats more frequently than protective behaviors, with limited attribution of responsibility for security measures to individual citizens. From a risk communication perspective, both findings highlight a lack of motivational messaging aimed at enhancing citizens’ self-efficacy in adopting protective behaviors. We therefore recommend that communicators and news media place greater emphasis on promoting cybersecurity practices and fostering public engagement in digital self-protection.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Meissner, F., Wilke, A. J., & Puikytė, M. (2025). How is cybersecurity discussed across media channels? Exploratory analyses of Twitter content and news reporting. Journal of Risk Research, 28(8), 855–875. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2025.2553079

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free