What are the responsibilities and job description for the Econometric Foresight Study on the impact of content prominence requirements for news media online position at Reporters Without Borders USA?
Partager
Reporters sans frontières (RSF) is an independent NGO defending the right to reliable information and working globally to promote the freedom, pluralism and independence of journalism. Fighting against censorship and providing support to journalists and media outlets persecuted because of their activities, RSF defends an essential pillar of democracy.
Context of the call for tender
Major digital platforms operate systems that reward virality and engagement over accuracy and reliability. The consequences are twofold: the economic fragility of public interest media is deepening, while misleading and low-quality content circulates more widely which makes citizens less likely to encounter trusted sources of information online.
RSF seeks to build a robust, independent evidence base study on the potential effects of Very Large Platforms’ (VLOPs) prioritisation of reliable sources on media economics, audience behaviour, and the information ecosystem as a whole.
The European Commission is currently looking into updating the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) to new market and technological developments. It launched a formal call for evidence in late 2025, with a full evaluation and review planned for 2026. The review process looks at whether the Directive's rules should be amended to ensure appropriate visibility and prominence for European media across digital platforms and connected devices.
The study commissioned as part of this brief aims to provide an evidence-based assessment of the potential benefits of introducing a due prominence obligation for the media sector and European citizens.
It will also foster RSF’s inputs into other legislative processes and future framework agreements negotiated with platforms or voluntary industry standards in the world.
Concepts and scope of the study
Prominence
“A prominence regime is the prevailing framework of rules which establishes to what extent platforms and intermediaries can, or should prioritise certain forms of content over others, and under what conditions of transparency, accountability, and liability.”
In the context of the AVMS Directive review, a due prominence obligation requiring online intermediaries to promote trusted sources of information means that it would be a legal requirement for platforms like social media networks, search engines, and news aggregators to prioritize and elevate content from verified, credible, and reliable sources.
Appropriate Prominence Measures Applied By Intermediary Services Enhancing The Findability And Visibility Of Trusted Sources Of Information Include, But Are Not Limited To, The Following
Trusted sources of information
On a general level, this concept refers to a type of organisation whose purpose is to produce public-interest content in compliance with professional and ethical norms. The intention is not to introduce any form of legally-grounded hierarchy between different pieces of content or individual journalists, but to adopt a principles-based approach to the processes, structures, and methods that relate to journalism as a professional practice.
In line with the approach outlined above, it is possible to identify trusted providers of information based on a diverse range of self-regulatory and/or co-regulatory instruments that have existed for a long time with a view to distinguish between professional media outlets operating according to high, widely-recognised, professional norms to produce reliable and accurate information and other content providers.
Geography
The geographic focus is the European Union. If sampling methods on specific countries will be applied, proposals should specify which markets (or countries) they intend to cover and justify the selection.
Platforms
Platforms to be considered include: Google (Search, Discover, News, AI summaries), Meta (Facebook, Instagram), YouTube, X/Twitter, TikTok, and Microsoft (Bing, Copilot). The scope of the study could be extended to GEN-AI services such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Perplexity. Proposals should justify any platform exclusion or proposed reordering of priority.
Research Objectives
The purpose of the study is to assess the potential effects of alternative regulatory scenarios. Respondents should estimate their respective consequences for audiences, market competition, the sustainability of the news ecosystem, and broader public-interest objectives.
Scenario 1 – Status quo (no due prominence)
The current regulatory and market environment, in which online platforms determine the visibility of news content primarily through their existing ranking, recommendation and monetisation systems, without any specific due prominence obligation.
Scenario 2 – Due prominence obligation
A regulatory framework requiring major online platforms to provide enhanced visibility and discoverability for trusted news sources meeting predefined eligibility criteria, while leaving existing monetisation mechanisms unchanged.
Scenario 3 – Due prominence combined with revenue-sharing mechanisms
A regulatory framework combining due prominence obligations with complementary measures designed to strengthen the financing of trusted journalism, such as preferential monetisation conditions, advertising-related mechanisms, or other value-sharing arrangements.
For each scenario, respondents should estimate the expected impacts across the following three complementary research questions. For each research question, we suggested evaluative questions that are expected to be refined in the applications.
RQ1. Audience behaviour and the information ecosystem
Submission Requirements
The Proposed Research Brief Is Intentionally Highly Structured. Respondents Are Nevertheless Encouraged To Propose Alternative Or Complementary Policy Scenarios And Research Methodologies In Their Submissions, Provided That These Are Clearly Justified. Proposals Should Address
Methodology
Respondents should propose a methodology appropriate to the three scenarios and three research questions (including evaluative questions). We expect proposals to clearly articulate: how reliable vs. unreliable sources will be distinguished and sampled; what prominence measures are modeled in each of the three scenarios; how their impact is measured; and how quantitative and qualitative measures will be integrated.
Proposals may draw on econometric modelling, publisher surveys, traffic data, focus groups, experimental design, expert interviews, desk research, or other approaches - the choice and justification thereof will be evaluated as part of the selection process.
Proposals may be submitted for a single integrated design or for modular options of varying ambition and budget. In either case, respondents should clearly define the boundaries of what is and is not included in the offer.
Deliverables and milestones
The deliverable structure and intermediate milestones should include at least :
The Following Skills Will Be Sought
Proposals Will Be Assessed According To The Following Criteria
Team of consultants interested in the assessment should include the following documents in their application:
Submission deadline
Applications are open until Monday 17th of August 2026, 9 am (CET time).
Publié le 09.07.2026
- Courriel
Reporters sans frontières (RSF) is an independent NGO defending the right to reliable information and working globally to promote the freedom, pluralism and independence of journalism. Fighting against censorship and providing support to journalists and media outlets persecuted because of their activities, RSF defends an essential pillar of democracy.
Context of the call for tender
Major digital platforms operate systems that reward virality and engagement over accuracy and reliability. The consequences are twofold: the economic fragility of public interest media is deepening, while misleading and low-quality content circulates more widely which makes citizens less likely to encounter trusted sources of information online.
RSF seeks to build a robust, independent evidence base study on the potential effects of Very Large Platforms’ (VLOPs) prioritisation of reliable sources on media economics, audience behaviour, and the information ecosystem as a whole.
The European Commission is currently looking into updating the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) to new market and technological developments. It launched a formal call for evidence in late 2025, with a full evaluation and review planned for 2026. The review process looks at whether the Directive's rules should be amended to ensure appropriate visibility and prominence for European media across digital platforms and connected devices.
The study commissioned as part of this brief aims to provide an evidence-based assessment of the potential benefits of introducing a due prominence obligation for the media sector and European citizens.
It will also foster RSF’s inputs into other legislative processes and future framework agreements negotiated with platforms or voluntary industry standards in the world.
Concepts and scope of the study
Prominence
“A prominence regime is the prevailing framework of rules which establishes to what extent platforms and intermediaries can, or should prioritise certain forms of content over others, and under what conditions of transparency, accountability, and liability.”
In the context of the AVMS Directive review, a due prominence obligation requiring online intermediaries to promote trusted sources of information means that it would be a legal requirement for platforms like social media networks, search engines, and news aggregators to prioritize and elevate content from verified, credible, and reliable sources.
Appropriate Prominence Measures Applied By Intermediary Services Enhancing The Findability And Visibility Of Trusted Sources Of Information Include, But Are Not Limited To, The Following
- algorithmic prioritization of trusted news sources
- the display of trust indicators
- the display of contextual data related to trusted news sources
- the implementation of filters or sorting options that highlight reliable sources
- etc.
Trusted sources of information
On a general level, this concept refers to a type of organisation whose purpose is to produce public-interest content in compliance with professional and ethical norms. The intention is not to introduce any form of legally-grounded hierarchy between different pieces of content or individual journalists, but to adopt a principles-based approach to the processes, structures, and methods that relate to journalism as a professional practice.
In line with the approach outlined above, it is possible to identify trusted providers of information based on a diverse range of self-regulatory and/or co-regulatory instruments that have existed for a long time with a view to distinguish between professional media outlets operating according to high, widely-recognised, professional norms to produce reliable and accurate information and other content providers.
Geography
The geographic focus is the European Union. If sampling methods on specific countries will be applied, proposals should specify which markets (or countries) they intend to cover and justify the selection.
Platforms
Platforms to be considered include: Google (Search, Discover, News, AI summaries), Meta (Facebook, Instagram), YouTube, X/Twitter, TikTok, and Microsoft (Bing, Copilot). The scope of the study could be extended to GEN-AI services such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Perplexity. Proposals should justify any platform exclusion or proposed reordering of priority.
Research Objectives
The purpose of the study is to assess the potential effects of alternative regulatory scenarios. Respondents should estimate their respective consequences for audiences, market competition, the sustainability of the news ecosystem, and broader public-interest objectives.
Scenario 1 – Status quo (no due prominence)
The current regulatory and market environment, in which online platforms determine the visibility of news content primarily through their existing ranking, recommendation and monetisation systems, without any specific due prominence obligation.
Scenario 2 – Due prominence obligation
A regulatory framework requiring major online platforms to provide enhanced visibility and discoverability for trusted news sources meeting predefined eligibility criteria, while leaving existing monetisation mechanisms unchanged.
Scenario 3 – Due prominence combined with revenue-sharing mechanisms
A regulatory framework combining due prominence obligations with complementary measures designed to strengthen the financing of trusted journalism, such as preferential monetisation conditions, advertising-related mechanisms, or other value-sharing arrangements.
For each scenario, respondents should estimate the expected impacts across the following three complementary research questions. For each research question, we suggested evaluative questions that are expected to be refined in the applications.
RQ1. Audience behaviour and the information ecosystem
- How do users perceive and respond to trust signals and source reliability cues?
- How often are users exposed to reliable news?
- What’s the impact on the diversity of news sources consumed, user satisfaction, trust in news, and broader information diets?
- What’s the impact on time spent consuming news, depth of engagement, conversion rate, and brand loyalty?
- How would prominence measures affect referral traffic, AI-generated responses, and news discoverability across search engines, social media platforms and generative AI services?
- Do impacts differ across audience segments, including age, digital literacy, platform usage, publisher type, publisher size, or prior exposure to low-quality content?
- How would each scenario affect competition between news media outlets (by segments, eg. large vs. small) , and in relation to independent creators?
- Would prominence measures reinforce existing market concentration or remove entry barriers ?
- How would each scenario affect the reach, visibility, and monetisation of low-reliability or disinformation content?
- What impact would each scenario have on advertising revenues, digital subscriptions, audience revenues, referral-based revenues, and publishers' overall profitability?
- Under Scenario 3, what additional effects could be expected from complementary financing mechanisms, including advertising-related measures or value-sharing arrangements?
Submission Requirements
The Proposed Research Brief Is Intentionally Highly Structured. Respondents Are Nevertheless Encouraged To Propose Alternative Or Complementary Policy Scenarios And Research Methodologies In Their Submissions, Provided That These Are Clearly Justified. Proposals Should Address
Methodology
Respondents should propose a methodology appropriate to the three scenarios and three research questions (including evaluative questions). We expect proposals to clearly articulate: how reliable vs. unreliable sources will be distinguished and sampled; what prominence measures are modeled in each of the three scenarios; how their impact is measured; and how quantitative and qualitative measures will be integrated.
Proposals may draw on econometric modelling, publisher surveys, traffic data, focus groups, experimental design, expert interviews, desk research, or other approaches - the choice and justification thereof will be evaluated as part of the selection process.
Proposals may be submitted for a single integrated design or for modular options of varying ambition and budget. In either case, respondents should clearly define the boundaries of what is and is not included in the offer.
Deliverables and milestones
The deliverable structure and intermediate milestones should include at least :
- Kick-off meeting and inception interviews
- An inception report - in English - that will form the basis for the assessment process and shall be approved by RSF before starting to implement the assessment. The report will include:
- An updated work plan and timeline based on the kick-off meeting and inception interviews.
- Updated methodology and data collection tools
- A list of stakeholders who will be contacted.
- A research report and an executive summary that should be delivered in November 2026.
- Milestones should also include: interim outputs, review points, and knowledge-sharing opportunities).
The Following Skills Will Be Sought
- Demonstrated expertise in media economics, platform dynamics, and/or audience research
- Knowledge of the European media and regulatory environment, and of journalistic trust standards in an asset
- Fluent spoken and written English
Proposals Will Be Assessed According To The Following Criteria
- Proposed methodology (e.g. methodological rigour and plausibility of the causal reasoning framework, coverage and balance across the three scenarios and three research questions)
- Proposed deliverables and milestone structure
- Consultants’ expertise and experience (i.e. team composition, track record)
- Duration and timeline
- Budget
Team of consultants interested in the assessment should include the following documents in their application:
- A technical proposal - not exceeding 15 pages - detailing the understanding of the assessment stakes, the proposed methodology, as well as the implementation schedule considered.
- CVs of the team members describing education and experience.
- A list describing previous assessment/consultancies. Please give details of similar contracts: client, budget and duration of the project concerned, budget and duration of the assessment/consultancy, main results, etc.
- A detailed financial proposal - estimate - with the total budget all taxes included.
Submission deadline
Applications are open until Monday 17th of August 2026, 9 am (CET time).
Publié le 09.07.2026