SciTransfer
Organization

LEIBNIZ-INSTITUT FUR MEDIENFORSCHUNG/HANS-BREDOW-INSTITUT

German Leibniz media research institute specialising in children's digital safety, platform regulation, and European media systems.

Research institutesocietyDEThin data (2/5)
H2020 projects
2
As coordinator
1
Total EC funding
€597K
Unique partners
20
What they do

Their core work

The Hans Bredow Institute (HBI) is Germany's leading independent media research institute, based in Hamburg, combining empirical social science, legal analysis, and policy-oriented expertise on how digital media and technology reshape society. Their work spans two interconnected concerns: protecting children and young people in digital environments, and understanding how large-scale media platforms affect European culture, information quality, and democratic discourse. They produce evidence bases that directly inform EU media regulation debates, making them a bridge between academic research and policy. Their European comparative perspective — studying media systems across member states rather than within a single country — is a defining feature of their research approach.

Core expertise

What they specialise in

Child online safety and digital childhoodprimary
1 project

HBI coordinated CO:RE (2020-2023), building a pan-European knowledge base on children's online risks, opportunities, and the measurable impact of digital technologies on young people.

Media platform regulation and externalitiesprimary
1 project

HBI participated in EUMEPLAT (2021-2024), a RIA project assessing how European media platforms generate positive and negative externalities for culture, covering media market regulation and platformization dynamics.

European media systems and Europeanisationsecondary
1 project

EUMEPLAT keywords include media systems, Europeanisation, European culture and identity, and media representations — areas requiring cross-national comparative expertise that HBI contributes as a participant.

Disinformation and fake news researchemerging
1 project

Fake news appears as an explicit keyword in EUMEPLAT, indicating HBI contributes expertise on information integrity within the broader platform governance research agenda.

Migration and media representationemerging
1 project

Migration studies and media representations are listed EUMEPLAT keywords, suggesting HBI brings sociological and communication science perspectives on how minority and migrant populations are depicted in European media.

Evolution & trajectory

How they've shifted over time

Early focus
Children's online safety
Recent focus
European media platform governance

In their earliest H2020 involvement (CO:RE, 2020), HBI's focus was squarely on the micro-level experience of individual users — specifically children — navigating online risks and opportunities, with an emphasis on evidence-gathering and youth-facing digital policy. By 2021, with EUMEPLAT, the focus expanded dramatically to macro-level structural analysis: how entire media ecosystems are reshaping European culture, how platformization reconfigures cultural industries, and how phenomena like fake news and migration coverage interact with media market regulation. The shift is from child protection research to platform governance and European media system analysis — a move from individual harm to systemic impact.

HBI is moving toward becoming a core academic voice in EU platform regulation debates — a direction that is likely to grow as the Digital Services Act and AI Act generate sustained demand for independent media research expertise.

Collaboration profile

How they like to work

Role: active_partnerReach: European16 countries collaborated

HBI both leads and joins consortia: they coordinated CO:RE, taking on the project management and knowledge-synthesis role, while participating as a domain expert in EUMEPLAT. With 20 distinct consortium partners across just two projects, they clearly work in broad, multi-institutional European networks rather than tight bilateral relationships. This pattern suggests they are sought after as credible, well-connected research partners who can anchor the media and society expertise in larger cross-sector consortia.

HBI has built a network of 20 unique consortium partners spanning 16 countries from just two projects — an unusually broad reach for an institution of this size. Their network is distinctly European in scope, consistent with their focus on comparative EU media systems research.

Why partner with them

What sets them apart

HBI occupies a rare niche as a standalone Leibniz research institute dedicated entirely to media research, giving it independence that university groups and commercial consultancies lack — a quality regulators and policymakers value when commissioning evidence. Unlike single-country media observatories, HBI operates with an explicitly European comparative lens, making them a natural fit for consortia that need to reconcile differing national media environments. For a consortium builder, they bring both the academic rigor of the Leibniz Association and direct connections to German and EU media policy networks.

Notable projects

Highlights from their portfolio

  • CO:RE
    HBI served as coordinator, leading a Europe-wide effort to synthesize research evidence on children and digital technologies — a rare leadership role for a mid-sized research institute, signalling strong project management and convening capacity.
  • EUMEPLAT
    This RIA project is HBI's largest funded project (EUR 305,675) and demonstrates their ability to contribute to research-intensive work on platform externalities, cultural industries, and fake news across European media systems.
Cross-sector capabilities
Digital policy and platform governanceEducation and digital literacySecurity and disinformation resilienceCultural industries and creative economy
Analysis note: Profile is based on only 2 H2020 projects spanning 2020-2024. HBI is a well-established institute whose full research portfolio far exceeds what EU project participation data captures. Expertise areas and evolution signals should be treated as a partial view; the institute's actual depth in media law, regulatory policy, and empirical media studies is likely broader than this data reflects.