Abstract Rarely any study investigates how information gatekeeping through the solutions and services enabled by algorithms, hereafter referred to as algorithmic technologies (AT), creates negative consequences for the users. To fill this gap, this state‐of‐the‐art review analyzes 229 relevant articles from diverse academic disciplines. We employed thematic analysis to identify, analyze, classify, and reveal the chain reactions among the negative consequences. We found that the gatekeeping of information (text, audio, video, and graphics) through AT like artificial intelligence (e.g., chatbots, large language models, machine learning, robots), decision support systems (used by banks, grocery stores, police, etc.), hashtags, online gaming platforms, search technologies (e.g., voice assistants, ChatGPT), and Web 3.0 (e.g., Internet of Things, non‐fungible tokens) creates or reinforces cognitive vulnerability, economic divide and financial vulnerability, information divide, physical vulnerability, psychological vulnerability, and social divide virtually and in the offline world. Theoretical implications include the hierarchical depiction of the chain reactions among the primary, secondary, and tertiary divides and vulnerabilities. To mitigate these negative consequences, we call for concerted efforts using top‐down strategies for governments, organizations, and technology experts to attain more transparency, accountability, ethical behavior, and moral practices, and bottom‐up strategies for users to be more alert, discerning, critical, and proactive.

Abstract Information and communication technology for development (ICT4D) research sporadically leverages information science scholarship. Our qualitative study employs the “information grounds” (IG) lens to investigate the consequences of information exchanges by pregnant women on Facebook, who are vulnerable in the doctor‐centric birth culture in rural America. The thematic analysis of in‐depth interviews with members and administrators of the Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) group shows that positive consequences outweigh negative consequences of information exchanges and lead to the following progression of outcomes: (a) VBAC group as an information ground, (b) social capital (e.g., cognitive, structural, and relational capital) built on the information ground, (c) seven emergent properties of the information ground, and (d) value co‐created (e.g., local, affordable, timely, enduring, and reliable support) by VBAC group members. The IG lens reveals the following roles of Facebook, an ICT, in development: (a) a linker that lets people with similar needs and interests convene and shapes their interactions, (b) a prerequisite to building an online, “third place” for social interactions, and (c) an apparatus for ubiquitously seeking, searching, sharing, and storing information in multiple formats and controlling its flow on the VBAC group. This paper fills in six gaps in the ICT4D research.

Abstract Rarely does any empirical investigation show how administrators routinely control information in online communities and alleviate misinformation, hate speech, and information overload supported by profit‐driven algorithms. Thematic analysis of in‐depth phone interviews with members and administrators of a “Vaginal Birth After Cesarean” (VBAC) group with over 500 new mothers on Facebook shows that the administrators make 19 choices for recurring, authoritative but evolving 19 information‐related activities when (a) forming the VBAC group over Facebook for local new mothers, (b) actively recruiting women who had a VBAC or have related competencies, (c) removing doctors and solicitors from the group, (d) setting up and revising guidelines for interactions in the group, (e) maintaining the focus of the group, (f) initiating distinct threads of conversations on the group, (g) tagging experts during conversations in the group, and (h) correcting misinformation. Thirty‐eight information practices of the administrators indicate their nine gatekeeping roles, seven of these roles help administrators alleviate misinformation, hate speech, and information overload. Findings also show that the management of members and their interactions is a prerequisite to controlling information in online communities. Prescriptions to social networking companies and guidelines for administrators of online communities are discussed at the end.

Abstract Since the inception of gatekeeping research in the 1940s, most studies on gatekeeping have been human‐centric, treating and studying individuals as gatekeepers, who perform their gatekeeping role using a combination of the following mechanisms: forming communities, and/or broadcasting, discovering‐searching, collecting, organizing, or protecting information. However, the nature of communication channels and how information is produced by and shared with users has fundamentally changed in the last 80 years. One significant change is the growing use of technology‐enabled metadata like hashtags when sharing information on social media. Rarely any study investigates whether hashtags can perform gatekeeping of information and what it means for information gatekeeping. This paper fills in the gap by conducting a content analysis of 77 interdisciplinary studies on hashtags and gatekeeping to confirm how they can implement six gatekeeping mechanisms. This study shows that hashtags expand our understanding of the role of technology solutions in gatekeeping and advance research on hierarchical gatekeeping. The benefits of hashtags for gatekeeping suggest that they act as “information anchors” for online communities, thereby highlighting the utility of information gatekeepers for society.

Fieldwork is indispensable for understanding, explaining, and predicting the role of information and communication technologies for development (ICT4D) of marginalized communities. Engaging with marginalized communities is at the heart of ICT4D fieldwork. However, vulnerabilities of marginalized communities can prevent them from participating in fieldwork. The goal of this paper is to report best practices for engaging with marginalized communities. The findings are grounded in our fieldwork that consisted of ten three-hour sessions, each including focus groups, surveys, and hands-on exercises, with 152 participants earning less than USD 2 a day, in their native language at ten rural and urban public libraries in India. We conclude that a combination of proactive planning around the vulnerabilities of marginalized communities, constant reflective monitoring of the vulnerabilities and resulting challenges during fieldwork, and appropriate responsive action to address the challenges is one of the best ways of conducting fieldwork, since it helped us manage a majority of the challenges resulting from geographic, temporal, technological, financial, educational, psychological, informational, infrastructural, social, and cultural vulnerabilities of the participants. Our organic and structured guidance in the form of lessons learned can help library and information science researchers and practitioners to customize fieldwork around the vulnerabilities of marginalized communities.