THE SHIFTING EPISTEMIC AUTHORITY IN JOURNALISM: A CASE STUDY OF PUBLIC TRUST IN FREELANCE JOURNALISTS AND POLITICAL INFLUENCERS VS. MAINSTREAM MEDIA IN BANGLADESH

Abstract

This study examines how freelance journalists and political influencers in Bangladesh reshape journalistic and epistemic authority in a politically pressured and digitally fragmented media environment. Using qualitative textual analysis of videos and audience comments, along with interviews with Bangladeshi journalists and media professionals, it explores how alternative media figures gain credibility outside mainstream news institutions. Findings show that their authority is built through counter-media positioning, interpretive truth-telling, evidence display, emotional connection, and audience recognition. Audience comments treat these figures as truth-tellers, guides, moral leaders, and political actors, while interviews show that mainstream journalists deny them professional legitimacy but acknowledge their public influence. Theoretically, the study extends field theory, epistemic authority, and boundary work by showing how digital audiences help produce symbolic capital and redraw the boundaries of journalism. It argues that journalistic authority in Bangladesh is being redistributed through platform-based recognition and contested struggles over truth and legitimacy. This study introduces ‘counter-media authority’ as a form of epistemic power through which alternative media figures gain public legitimacy by opposing and replacing mainstream journalism in a context of institutional distrust.