Gamified Digital Journalism as a New Rhetorical Practice of Engagement, Learning, and Interaction

Реторика, медии, семиотика

Rhetoric, Media, Semiotics

DOI 10.55206/GECZ4525

Tetiana Zinovieva

Odesa Polytechnic National University

Е-mail: zinovieva@op.edu.ua

Mariia Yakubovska

Odesa Polytechnic National University

E-mail: yakubovska@op.edu

Abstract: The article examines gamified digital journalism as an emerging rhetorical practice that promotes audience engagement, participatory learning, and interactive communication. It traces the transformation of rhetoric from classical to digital and gamified forms, highlighting the correspondence between rhetorical strategies and gamification techniques, as well as the growing role of algorithms and attention-management mechanisms. The paper further explores the ethical dimensions of rhetorical and gamified paradigms through interna­tional case studies, offering a conceptual framework that integrates rhetorical theory, media studies, and gamification principles to analyse the evolution of journalistic storytelling in the digital age. The study outlines the rhetorical shift from classical persuasion towards dialogic and interactive strategies, positioning gamification not only as a tool of engagement design but also as a rhetorical device capable of shaping perception and behaviour. Special attention is given to game-based me­chanics – such as choice, challenge, feedback, and narrative immersion – and their impact on journalistic formats and the journalist–audience relationship. Selected gamified journalism projects are analysed in terms of narrative structure, visual logic, rhetorical intent, and ethical implications. At the same time, the study identifies potential risks, including manipulation, oversimplification, distortion of serious content through playful framing, and the dominance of algorithmic sys­tems that prioritise engagement over informational value. The article concludes that gamified journalism constitutes a rhetorical innovation with transformative potential, combining persuasion, education, and interactivity in ways that can strengthen civic participation and media literacy – provided it is implemented transparently and ethically.

Keywords: gamification, digital journalism, rhetoric, audience engage­ment, interactivity, narrative, media literacy, ethics.

Introduction

In the contemporary digital media landscape, there is an increasing demand for effective audience engagement mechanisms – particularly in the context of fragmented news consumption, information fatigue, and declining trust in tra­ditional media. In light of these challenges, gamification emerges as a promising tool for transforming the rhetoric of digital journalism from a predominantly reproductive model to one that is interactive – an approach that not only informs but also actively involves audiences in the communication process. In the digital age, gamification serves as an engagement technology that leverages game me­chanics to capture attention, encourage deeper content consumption, and foster an emotional connection with media products. [1]

This article proposes to examine gamification as a novel rhetorical practice within digital journalism – one that integrates elements of engagement, educa­tion, and interaction. Such an approach offers potential not only for sustaining attention but also for cultivating critical thinking, enhancing media literacy, and reinforcing ethical standards of interaction within the digital environment. Despite the growing interest in gamification within the fields of education, marketing, and management [2]; [3]; [4]; [5], journalism remains a relatively marginal focus in this body of research [6]; [7]. Existing studies [8]] primarily concentrate on isolated case studies and do not offer a comprehensive conceptual framework for understanding gamification as a rhetorical practice.

While existing studies have explored interactive storytelling, personalisa­tion, and player engagement in game environments [12]; [13], journalism-specific gamification is often addressed through isolated case studies [14]; [15] and lacks a cohesive conceptual framework. In particular, the transformation of storytelling and narrative structures under the influence of game mechanics remains underexplored in journalism studies, despite increasing academic inter­est in game-based storytelling more broadly [16]; [17]; [18]; [19]; [20]. Work on procedural rhetoric [21] and algorithmic narrativity [19] further highlights the epistemological shifts taking place in digital media.

The transformation of storytelling and narrative structures under the influ­ence of game mechanics in digital journalism remains underexplored, despite the increasing academic attention to game-based storytelling more broadly [17]; [22]; [23]; [24]; [25]; [26]. The relevance of this research therefore lies not only in the societal need to improve communication between journalists and audiences amid media convergence, but also in addressing a scholarly gap concerning the understanding of gamification as a tool of new media rhetoric.

The relevance of this research therefore lies  not only in the societal need to improve communication between journalists and audiences amid media convergence, but also in addressing a scholarly gap concerning the understanding of gamification as a tool of new media rhetoric.

The aim of this study is to conceptualise gamification as a novel rhetorical practice within digital journalism – one that transforms strategies of engagement, education, and audience interaction. It seeks to explore both the potential and the limitations of gamification in shaping innovative media formats and enhancing the effectiveness of communication in the digital environment.

Research Objectives:

  1. To develop a conceptual framework for understanding gamified digital journalism as a new rhetorical practice.
  2. To examine the rhetorical shift in contemporary journalism from classical persuasion models to dialogic, interactive communication.
  3. To explore gamification as both a rhetorical strategy (deliberate design for engagement) and a rhetorical stratagem (subtle influence or manipu­la­tion).
  4. To investigate how digital journalism functions as a medium for im­plementing game-based strategies, focusing on structure, narrative, and audience interaction.
  5. To analyse selected examples of gamified journalism projects, iden­ti­fying their rhetorical features, narrative logic, and ethical implications.
  6. To identify and discuss potential problems and risks associated with gamification in journalism, including ethical concerns and the distortion of public discourse.
  7. To formulate discussion questions for further critical reflection on the use of gamification in journalistic practice.

Research methods and study design. This study employs a mixed-methods qualitative approach. A literature review of academic sources on gamification, digital journalism, and rhetorical theory forms the conceptual framework. Comparative rhetorical analysis is used to trace the shift from classical persuasion to interactive dialogue in journalism. Gamification is examined both theoretically and rhetorically to distinguish between strategic engagement and subtle manipu­la­tion. Structural and narrative analyses are applied to gamified journalism formats, with emphasis on audience interaction. Selected projects are studied through case study analysis, using textual, visual, and rhetorical tools. Critical discourse analysis helps identify ethical risks and communicative distortions. Discussion prompts are formulated to support further scholarly reflection.

A Conceptual Framework of Gamified Digital Journalism as New Rhetori­cal Practice

In the digital age, rhetoric undergoes significant transformation, acquiring new forms and functions shaped by the dynamics of user–media interaction. One such form is gamification – the appropriation of game mechanics and principles to foster engagement, education, and interaction within journalistic contexts. This approach marks a paradigmatic shift in communication: from a traditional subject–object model to subject–subject relations grounded in dialogue and participation. [27] Within journalism, gamification not only enhances user immersion but also opens up novel rhetorical modalities – through play, simula­tion, narrative interactivity, and personalised experience. [28; 29; 30]

It is important to distinguish between the concepts of gamification and game design. The former refers to a strategic application of game-based elements in non-game contexts – such as badges, leaderboards, competition, “win-win” lotteries, and progress visualisations – to incentivise user engagement. [31] In contrast, game design denotes the broader process of crafting interactive game worlds, which may incorporate journalistic content (e.g., immersive journalism [32]), educational experiences (e.g., serious games [33]; [34]), entertainment, or political storytelling. [35]

According to Ian Bogost’s theory of procedural rhetoric, games are persuasive not only through text or imagery but via algorithmic logic – the rules of play, the structure of actions, and the mechanics of interaction. [28] This enables journalistic content to exert influence on both a rational and an affective–empathetic level, which is particularly crucial when addressing complex topics such as war, crisis, or social injustice.

Consequently, a new thesaural system is emerging in journalism, with key concepts including game mechanics, immersion, personalisation, interactivity, participation, emotional resonance, and user experience. These serve as the lexico-semantic foundation for the conceptualisation of gamified journalism. Furthermore, gamification supports the development of participatory media models, where audiences are not passive consumers but active agents in the communicative process. [36]

Game mechanics significantly transform modes of storytelling within digital environments. This shift has been examined by a number of scholars investigating the interplay between game mechanics and narrative structures. In his work, T. Dubbelman [see reference 22] analyses how game mechanics facilitate narrative development – particularly through spatial conflicts, empathy, and moral dilemmas that emerge during gameplay. He argues that game mechanics create situations that prompt behavioural change in players, engaging them in emotional and moral interaction with the narrative.

In their article “Mechanical meaning: The relationship between game mechanics and story in ergodic theatre”, G. Greig [23] explores how mechanics generate so-called “ludonarrative loops,” where players’ actions directly influ­ence plot development. This model positions the player not merely as a passive observer but as an active participant in the narrative process, establishing an interactive link between game rules (mechanics) and storyline. B. A. Larsen and G. Schoenau-Fog [see reference 17] propose a model that describes the interrela­tion between game mechanics, context, and narrative. They emphasise the role of mechanics in shaping narrative experience, whereby the player’s choices directly impact the course of events and, consequently, the interpretation of the story. L. Chen, D. Dowling, and K. Goetz [24] investigate how game rules and mechanics function narratively in real-world contexts, offering the concept of “ludic grammar” – a structure that includes interactive storytelling. They argue that game elements not only support plot development but also define its architecture, enabling players to generate unique stories within predetermined parameters.

What emerges as particularly important is how these studies help con­cep­tualise the evolution of media communication, in which gamification functions not merely as a tool of audience engagement but as a strategy for fostering new forms of interaction. The shift from one-way to mutual com­mu­nication, as emphasised by D. McQuail [36] and N. Couldry [see reference 27], highlights the significance of game mechanics in building a participatory model of media engagement – one that promotes active user involvement and supports the develop­ment of critical thinking through gamified strategies.

Taken together, these sources underscore the relevance of gamification as a new rhetorical strategy in the digital space – one that fosters more interactive, dialogical, and critically engaged consumption of content, particularly within the landscape of new media.

The historiographical framework for understanding gamified journalism encompasses several key areas of scholarly inquiry: foundations of gamification game design [see reference 3]; [37]; play as a cultural foundation [38]; [39]; games as communication [see references 27; 28]; [40]; digital narrative and self-representation [see references 29; 30; 31]; journalism as a gamified media practice. [36]

In the classical tradition, rhetoric was conceived as the art of persuasion – predominantly a one-directional influence exerted by the speaker (orators, authors) upon a passive audience [41]; [42]. This model, grounded in logos, ethos, and pathos, dominated for centuries and shaped journalistic practice well into the twentieth century, which remained oriented towards the ideals of objectivity, rationality, and professional detachment. However, in the digital age, journalism is undergoing profound transformations. Media consumption has become flexible, individualised, and interactive, prompting a shift towards a new form of rhetoric–dialogic, interactive, and adaptive. [40] This rhetorical transi­tion also reflects a broader move from the mass media paradigm to one of mass communication, where the audience is no longer a passive recipient but an active participant in the communicative process. [43]

Contemporary research points to a transition in journalistic communication from a transmission model to one of meaning co-creation, in which the audience acts not merely as a recipient but as a co-producer of informational content [44]; [45]. In this context, journalistic rhetoric evolves beyond a tool of influence and persuasion; it increasingly incorporates elements of engagement, play, emotional resonance, and social interaction. Within digital environments, rhetoric is pro­gressively shaped by the mechanisms of the “active interface” [46], where the mode of delivery–navigation, multimedia integration, interactivity – becomes as central to meaning and reception as the content itself.

Despite the growing scholarly interest in the dynamics of digital commu­nication, the rhetorical dimension of journalism remains underexplored from an interdisciplinary perspective. Most existing studies focus either on the linguistic representation of news [47]; [48], or on the technological facets of user interaction [49], often overlooking the hybrid nature of contemporary journalistic rhetoric. This emerging rhetoric blends classical persuasive strategies with interactive, emotional, and ludic practices. There is a pressing need for a renewed theoretical framework that reconceptualises journalistic rhetoric–not merely as an instrument of persuasion, but as a medium for constructive dialogue that fosters values, emotional connections, and civic engagement within the digital public sphere.

The convergence of rhetoric, game, and journalism unfolds across several interconnected levels: instrumental, narrative, cultural-communicative, and user-centred. At the instrumental level, game mechanics are integrated into news formats through features like interactive visuals, badges, and quizzes. [50] On the narrative level, storytelling adopts game design elements – branching narratives, role-playing, and procedural structures – reshaping how journalistic content is constructed. The cultural-communicative level reflects a broader societal shift toward playfulness and interactivity, influencing how journalism is produced and received. At the user level, audiences are no longer passive consumers but active participants – players who explore, interact with, and solve content rather than simply read or view it.

The transformation of rhetoric can be systematically examined across three dimensions: communication, learning goals, and attention management. Each rhetorical system – classical, digital, and gamified – introduces specific methods, techniques, and underlying concepts that reflect its cultural and technological context.

In the sphere of communication, classical rhetoric is grounded in public debate, dialogue, and rhetorical questioning. Its techniques emphasize reaction to the opponent and appeal to authority, while communication is oriented toward real-time presence and an audience positioned primarily as listeners. Digital rhetoric, by contrast, expands interaction through comments, likes, and social media practices. Here, surveys, live chats, and stories facilitate feedback and foster digital communities, enabling a shift from passive listening to active participation. Gamified rhetoric advances this trajectory further, employing collaboration in gaming environments and competitive frameworks. Through multiplayer tasks and shared narrative progression, it establishes concepts of joint story creation, cooperation, and role-playing interaction.

Regarding learning goals, classical rhetoric relies on dialectics, examples, and allegories. Techniques such as the Socratic method and instructive stories are rooted in logos and the persuasive force of argumentation. Digital rhetoric introduces new epistemic forms through hyperlinks, interactive diagrams, and gamified simulations. Infographics, microlearning formats, and video tutorials encourage cognitive navigation and self-directed learning supported by con­tinuous feedback. Gamified rhetoric, in turn, integrates learning into play through simulations and story-driven tasks. Progressive complexity and experimentation, including the principle of “learning through failure,” foster a model of knowledge acquisition based on experience and active engagement.

In terms of attention management, classical rhetoric relies on emotional appeal, rhetorical figures, and oratory techniques such as intonation and direct address. This mode constructs ethos and charisma as the basis for trust in the speaker. Digital rhetoric, however, employs multimedia formats, interactivity, and algorithmic distribution. Clickbait, storytelling, and push notifications exemplify its techniques, while concepts of UX design, visual appeal, and audience response redefine engagement in the digital environment. Gamified rhetoric leverages points, ratings, and badges to sustain attention. Challenges, achievements, and competitive dynamics frame motivation through game mechanics, offering learners and participants autonomy, recognition, and status.

Overall, the comparison demonstrates that rhetorical practices evolve alongside technological innovations. Whereas classical rhetoric focuses on dialogue, persuasion, and ethos, digital rhetoric emphasizes interactivity and cognitive navigation, and gamified rhetoric introduces motivational strategies rooted in play and collaboration. This trajectory reveals the ongoing recon­figuration of rhetorical systems in response to shifts in media environments and cultural expectations.

Classical rhetoric relies on the power of oral language, logic and emotional impact, focusing on the speaker and the immediate audience. Digital rhetoric expands these boundaries, using multimedia tools and interactive channels to enhance communication and engagement. In contrast, gamified rhetoric offers a new paradigm. It does not simply communicate, but creates game situations that actively involve the user, teach through experience and stimulate interaction based on intrinsic motivation. Thus, gamification acts not only as an engagement technique but as a full-fledged rhetorical system that integrates elements of classical and digital rhetoric, reinforcing them through game mechanics. This opens up new opportunities for journalism, particularly in the creation of en­gaging, educational, and interactive media content.

Gamification as a rhetorical strategy and rhetorical stratagem

In the digital age, journalism increasingly employs gamification not merely as a tool for audience engagement, but as a rhetorical strategy that shapes modes of communication, meaning-making, and persuasion. Unlike traditional rhetoric, which relies on verbal and logical strategies such as ethos, pathos, and logos, gamification constructs an interactive rhetoric whereby persuasion is achieved through user experience, choice, and immersion in simulated situations. [51]; [52]; [53]; [54]. It is the mechanics of participation–game tasks, challenges, points, narrative progression – that serve as appeals to the intellect, emotions, and action, producing what may be termed participatory persuasion.

According to I. Bogost [see reference 51], video games and ludic practices can function as a form of procedural rhetoric – a means of persuasion through rules, systems logic, and interaction. In journalism, this manifests in formats such as newsgames or interactive investigations, wherein the user does not merely read a story but experiences its internal logic, selects a position, attempts to resolve conflicts, or grasp the complexities of a situation. In this way, gamification in digital journalism transforms the passive consumer into an active co-creator of meaning, shifting the emphasis from information transmission to the construction of personal experience.

This approach also redefines the paradigm of journalistic ethical respon­sibility: it is no longer solely what is said that matters, but how the user experiences it. In the digital environment, media interaction increasingly assumes a subject-to-subject character, where participants in communication are not transmitter and passive receiver, but equal co-creators of content and meaning. This transformation aligns with a broader media paradigm shift – from a vertical model of influence to a horizontal model of interaction. [see reference 27]

Gamified rhetoric, in contrast to manipulative strategies, has the potential to foster critical thinking, empathy, and media literacy. [8] In this sense, gamification emerges as a flexible instrument of a new journalistic rhetoric – one in which persuasion is achieved not through the force of argument alone, but via emotional and cognitive immersion in a simulated social experience. [55]

It is now evident that gamification in digital media and journalism has become a significant tool for audience engagement, fostering interaction, and developing new narrative strategies. It employs various mechanics that transform traditional information delivery methods, generating more interactive and immer­sive user environments. Hence, it is essential to examine how specific gamifica­tion elements correlate with rhetorical strategies such as participation appeal, information manipulation, the cultivation of critical thinking, and emo­tional en­gage­ment.

Gamification, as a communication strategy, is increasingly regarded as an effective tool for enhancing audience motivation, encouraging interaction, and fostering sustained behavioural change. Achievement systems, including points, badges, and rewards, function as emotional engagement tools that stimulate more active participation. Such mechanisms create a cycle of positive reinforcement, which encourages consistent activity while validating and socially recognising users’ contributions. [56, see reference 1] Leaderboards, as a form of social recognition, motivate through competition, situating performance within a comparative framework that lends symbolic value to individual success. [57]

An important factor in sustaining intrinsic motivation lies in granting user autonomy through personalised experiences. Tools such as avatars or the ability to select routes enhance the sense of agency, which correlates with deeper en­gagement and prolonged interaction. [1]. Variable difficulty levels and the gradual unlocking of new stages support critical thinking, as users are required to adapt and make informed decisions. [59] This type of progression stimulates curiosity and maintains attention through the anticipation of new content. [see reference 3]

However, gamification may also produce adverse effects, including a diminished capacity for critical awareness. The so-called “corridor effect” – linked to linear level-based progression – can induce trance-like states, akin to those prompted by clickbait, in which each subsequent interaction follows automatically without reflection [60]; [61]. Emotionally charged headlines, much like game levels, generate cognitive uncertainty and arousal that drive impulsive, automatic navigation from one item to the next. [62]

Interactive engagement is facilitated through multiplayer mechanisms, which encourage real-time communication and the exchange of ideas among users [62]. Immediate feedback – conveyed through auditory and visual cues – maintains focus and provides sensory reinforcement that guides user action. [63] Competitive elements, such as virtual points, rankings, and leaderboards, serve as motivational drivers by promoting social comparison and status-seeking behaviour. In such environments, users are incentivised to verify or produce information to enhance their standing. [64] Shared missions foster rhetorical interaction and the co-construction of meaning through teamwork [59], while social interface features, including chat functions and forums, deepen inter­personal communication, extending journalism’s rhetorical role into the realm of participatory culture. [65] Synchronous competitions and challenge-based for­mats stimulate reflexive reasoning and strategic argumentation in real time. [3]

In learning and behaviour change contexts, gamification ensures clarity of purpose through well-defined tasks and challenges. Adaptive pathways enable scaffolded cognitive development, unlocking new content based on prior actions and acquired knowledge. Branching narrative structures foster metacog­nitive awareness, compelling users to assess the outcomes and con­sequences of their decisions. [1] Verification mechanisms – such as peer endorsements or credibility ratings – promote critical thinking as users strive to establish or maintain a reputable presence. [1] Lastly, role-based storylines and narrative progression create immersive expe­riences that encourage emotional engagement and continuity, strengthening user identification and cognitive focus. [59]

Thus, gamification in communicative practice integrates motivational, rhetorical, and social mechanisms to construct a multifaceted model of influence–one that not only attracts and retains audiences but also supports deeper content assimilation, reflection, and behavioural transformation.

The convergence of rhetorical strategies with gamification practices demonstrates how classical means of persuasion are reinterpreted through inter­active design and digital game mechanics. Each rhetorical appeal – logos, ethos, pathos, and extended strategies of framing, narrative, and visual persuasion – finds its equivalent in gamified elements that reinforce user motivation and engagement.

The rhetorical mode of logos, based on logical reasoning, facts, and rational argumentation, is operationalized in gamification through progress bars, points, performance tracking, and analytics. These elements provide users with visible indicators of their achievements and enable them to perceive the rational con­se­quences of their actions.

The appeal to ethos, which traditionally establishes credibility and trust, corresponds to levels, titles, badges, and expert roles within gamified environ­ments. By attaining such markers, users strengthen their reputation, acquire authority, and position themselves as leaders within the community.

The domain of pathos, oriented toward emotions and sentiments, is expressed through storytelling, avatars, visual aesthetics, and affect-driven tasks. These instruments foster emotional involvement, enabling users to identify with narratives and develop personal connections with the system.

Framing, as a rhetorical technique of strategically presenting ideas, finds an analogue in the design of tasks as challenges or missions. This transformation reframes otherwise routine actions as purposeful adventures, thereby increasing engagement through a sense of quest and meaning.

Closely related is the concept of interactive narrative, which corresponds to non-linear plotlines, branching dialogues, and user-driven decisions. Such mechanics enhance the perception of agency and immersion, allowing parti­ci­pants to co-create their experience.

The strategy of call to participation manifests in gamification through daily tasks, social invitations, and leaderboards. These elements act as rhetorical prompts that stimulate user involvement by leveraging social dynamics and competition.

Through narrative identification, users associate themselves with avatars, role selections, or personalised game settings. This identification strengthens emotional attachment and deepens the persuasive effect of the system.

Visual rhetoric operates in gamification via graphic design, user interfaces, and visual feedback. Aesthetic and symbolic elements here enhance both cog­nitive clarity and emotional resonance.

The appeal to values is realised through collaborative goals, social mis­sions, or integrations with charitable causes. By aligning play with ideals such as justice, community, or ecological responsibility, gamified systems gain norma­tive weight and ethical significance.

The use of irony and memetic strategies – humour, sarcasm, or cultural references – corresponds to features like Easter eggs, humorous badges, and meme-based rewards. These mechanisms enhance relatability and foster cultural proximity, particularly for digital-native users accustomed to memetic commu­nication.

Taken together, these correspondences reveal that gamification not only borrows rhetorical strategies but also reconfigures them into interactive and participatory forms. As a result, persuasion within gamified systems is achieved not solely through traditional appeals but through experiential design that merges logic, trust, emotion, and cultural resonance into a holistic motivational frame­work.

Game mechanics within the framework of gamification significantly contribute to the formation of new models of audience engagement in digital media environments. These mechanisms not only enhance user motivation but also exert a profound influence on cognitive processes and behavioural patterns. Consequently, gamification emerges as a critical instrument in constructing ef­fective rhetorical strategies within the contemporary media landscape – strategies that are rooted in participation, interaction, and experiential learning.

Nonetheless, there exists a latent risk that gamification may be transformed into what is referred to as a “rhetorical strategem”. A group of Ukrainian scholars from Kharkiv define a rhetorical strategem as “a system of aggressive commu­nicative techniques designed to entrap one within a ‘labyrinth of mirrored reflections’ of the Other’s thought, with the aim of anticipating and neutralising their subsequent moves”. [66] According to these researchers, such a mode of communication acquires a manipulative character and is laden with rhetorical traps, including “rhetorical diversions”, “rhetorical gambits”, “rhetorical clamps”, and “rhetorical blinds”. Both practices – gamification and rhetorical strategems – demonstrate the potential for manipulative deployment, primarily through the exploitation of the audience’s attention, emotional investment, and cognitive resources. [67]

The rhetorical strategem, as a sophisticated logographic modelling of dis­cursive influence, constructs a scenario of social action. It builds a textual architecture in which the interlocutor is persuaded not merely by argument, but by the emotional-cognitive atmosphere, symbolic framework, authorial persona, and the implied behavioural model. Gamification exhibits a structurally ana­logous configuration: its designer engineers a system of motiva­tions and rules into which the user is immersed, engaging with a deliberately constructed reality. Both the logographer and the game designer orchestrate a guided interaction, wherein the participant (audience or player) performs roles that have been pre-scripted in advance. In rhetoric, such a system aims to enforce a particular interpretation of reality; in gamification, it seeks to cultivate loyalty, motivation, and user engagement. Both approaches appeal to the emotional and cognitive core of perception: the rhetorical triad of ethos, pathos, and logos finds its analogue in gamification through aesthetics, reward structures, and progres­sion mechanisms.

In rhetorical discourse, the gambit and the clamps (labetae) function as diversions that shift the focus of attention, reconfigure the terminological field, and activate a mechanism of internal consent – often bypassing full cognitive engagement. Gamification deploys similar dynamics through so-called “reward systems”: badges, leaderboards, and quests. [68] For example, the rhetorical gambit, typically involving provisional agreement with an opponent, finds its counterpart in gameplay as the “tutorial level”, where the player is permitted to experience success without genuine challenge. This produces an illusion of control, while in reality fostering dependency on the internal logic of the game.

Gamified systems’ imposition of optimal routes may align with the rhetorical function of “labetae”, which simulates alternative possibilities. Here, dozens of apparent options conceal a single preordained path to “success”, reinforced through visual, material, or symbolic rewards. Both gamification and rhetoric construct “labyrinths” of choice, which operate as scripts of directed behaviour. In both cases, the model adopts the appearance of a game, while in fact constituting a mechanism of influence. A shared feature of both strategies is their capacity to obscure intent. Gamification may exploit dopaminergic depen­dency on achievement, engendering a constant pursuit of reward that supplants intrinsic motivation. Similarly, the rhetorical strategem – through verbal traps and tactical appropriations such as gambits – manipulates arguments, diverting the discourse into terrain advantageous to the speaker.

In each instance, we encounter an asymmetry of information: the audience or player remains unaware of the full set of rules, and is therefore placed in an inherently unequal position. This gives rise to an ethical dilemma, as engagement is transfigured into retention, and persuasion into imposition.

Some gamification and rhetorical strategems construct models of social behaviour – the former through algorithmic reward and structured experiential design, the latter via the linguistic engineering of meaning. Each technique constructs social reality as a symbolic space [69], where not only facts, but also representations, associations, and ideologemes, exert influence. Both the lo­gogra­pher and the game designer create a controlled interaction, in which the participant (the audience or the player) performs predetermined roles.

Each paradigm – rhetorical and gamification – can act as means of humanistic persuasion or as tools of technological exploitation. Therefore, their use requires ethical reflection and critical awareness on the part of both creators and consumers. In terms of goals, rhetoric traditionally seeks persuasion through the imposition of specific models of perception and interpretation. Gamification, by contrast, is oriented toward engagement, attention retention, and the modifica­tion of user behaviour. Despite this distinction, both paradigms operate as ins­truments of influence directed at shaping human responses and decision-making. The means of influence differ in form but converge in function. Rhetoric employs verbal traps, gambits, stylistic tricks, labetae, and crafted images to shape perception and argumentation. Gamification relies on badges, levels, awards, leaderboards, and achievements. While rhetoric manipulates through language, gamification translates these strategies into symbolic rewards that structure user motivation and activity.

The script as a tool of influence also has parallels in both paradigms. In rhetoric, the logographer designs persuasive discourse, while in gamification the “gamifier” creates scenarios that allow for personalization, choice of alternatives, and the construction of social realities within digital environments. Both practices guide participants through predesigned pathways, subtly framing perception and behaviour.

The potential threats reveal the risks inherent in these persuasive systems. Rhetoric may distort meaning and manipulate arguments, while gamification risks exploiting human vulnerabilities, such as the innate desire for recognition or rewards. Moreover, gamification can replace intrinsic motivation with ex­trinsic incentives, leading to a shallow form of engagement. Particularly con­cerning is the trivialisation of serious topics when framed through game me­chanics, which may diminish their perceived significance.

Finally, the results underscore the formative power of both paradigms. Rhetoric contributes to identity formation and influences social choice, whereas gamification shapes behavioural patterns and cultivates digital habits. Both, therefore, act not merely as communication tools but as frameworks that mould cultural practices, ethical orientations, and modes of participation in society. Gami­fica­tion, when employed as a rhetorical strategy, can serve as a powerful tool for audience engagement and motivation. However, its application is accompanied by a range of risks that may undermine the effectiveness of com­munication and raise ethical concerns. Consequently, it is essential to critically assess the context, objectives, and potential implications of incorpo­rating gamified elements into rhetorical frameworks.

Digital journalism as a medium for implementing game strategies. Examples of gamified journalism projects

Digital journalism has transformed not only the forms through which news is delivered, but also the principles underpinning audience engagement, opening up a space for the integration of game strategies – mechanics, elements, and logics borrowed from video games. [59] Thanks to its interactivity, multimedia nature, and dynamism, the digital media environment offers unique opportunities to engage users in the process of news consumption through gamified formats and immersive technologies. In this context, gamification does not imply turning journalism into a game, but rather the use of game elements – such as points, missions, progress tracking, and branching scenarios – to stimulate interest, encourage participation, and foster critical engagement with information.

Digital platforms – particularly mobile applications, interactive longreads, multimedia reports, and screen-life videos – have become the infrastructural foundation for the development of game-based journalistic projects, notably within the genre of newsgames: games that simulate real socio-political situations or replicate investigative logic. [71] Successful examples of such formats, including “A year of full-scale war” [72], “How Voter Fraud Works – and Mostly Doesn’t” (ProPublica) [73] and “Syrian Journey” (BBC) [74], demonstrate that journalism can combine factual reporting with emotional immersion and empathy. This pushes journalistic practice beyond the boundaries of traditional reportage and brings it closer to transmedia storytelling, in which the user be­comes not only a reader but also an active agent in the unfolding of the narrative.

In the Ukrainian media landscape, gamification has yet to become a widespread phenomenon; however, a number of projects already demonstrate its rhetorical potential. Notably, the simulator “Feykohryz” (Fake-Eater) [75], developed by the NGO Internews Ukraine, combines game elements with fact-checking: the user must identify fake news, earning points and a ranking in the process. Here, gamification functions as a rhetorical device through practical engagement rather than abstract messaging, thereby fostering media-literate behaviour.

In comparison to narrativisation – which appeals to storytelling and empathy (as seen in longreads produced by Suspilne or Texty.org.ua) – gamification not only conveys a narrative but actively involves the user in shaping it, thereby amplifying its rhetorical effect. While visualisation (such as infographics, maps, and charts) aims to simplify data perception, gamification seeks to create experiential engagement with decision-making in near-real conditions. Interaction in the form of comments or polls offers another rhetorical practice of digital journalism, yet it typically remains reactive. In contrast, gamified products enable anticipatory engagement: users immerse themselves in action-based models in advance.

In Bulgaria, gamification is being actively implemented in educational, cultural, and media initiatives aimed at enhancing media literacy and involving young people in socially significant issues. For instance, the project “gaMEfy” [76], supported by Erasmus+, focuses on developing digital and media literacy among youth through gamified learning. It includes an interactive multiplayer simulation game, educational materials, and an online platform for resources (europskydialog.eu).

Another example is the “Vox Populi” [77] initiative, which applied gamification strategies on social media to incentivise the sharing of content related to EU cohesion policy. The most active participants were given the opportunity to visit EU-funded projects, which contributed to extensive coverage in over 100 national and regional media outlets.

These examples illustrate how gamification can serve as an effective rhetorical tool within digital journalism, transforming passive information consumers into active participants in the communication process. Unlike tradi­tional rhetorical techniques such as narrativisation or visualisation, gamification provides an interactive experience that fosters deeper understanding and audience engagement.

Thus, gamification in digital journalism should not merely be seen as a technical add-on, but as a new rhetorical strategy grounded in experience, decision-making, and personal involvement – particularly in formats related to education, fact-checking, and investigative reporting. While its implementation requires ethical sensitivity, it holds considerable potential across both journalistic and educational genres.

Gamification in digital journalism offers new forms of audience engage­ment by blending narrative, gameplay, and personalised experience. Through interactive mechanics such as points, levels, and decision-making, users become not merely readers but active participants in the media process. Gamified formats like “Syrian Journey” [74] by the BBC and “Cutthroat Capitalism” by Wired [78] illustrate how ludonarrative logic can facilitate deeper under­standing of complex social issues by immersing users in simulated scenarios. [3] This approach fosters digital literacy, critical thinking, and emotional involve­ment, as audiences influence the storyline, make decisions, and reflect on the content. [3]

Interactive storytelling that incorporates user-generated content (UGC) expands the boundaries of journalistic narrative, creating a space for co-participa­tion and personalised news consumption. Formats such as “Snow Fall” by The New York Times [81] integrate text, video, infographics, and gamified elements, encouraging active engagement and even content creation. This not only increases interest and trust in news but also nurtures an ethical stance, positioning the user as a moral agent capable of critical judgement. As a result, gamification emerges as a powerful tool for democratic communication and social insight.

All the aforementioned examples employ a range of rhetorically and ethi­cally driven strategies. These include emotional engagement, where users form deep affective responses through personalised and simulated experiences [see reference 52]; [83], and cognitive modelling of moral dilemmas, enabling audiences to navigate complex decisions and their social consequences. Such strategies are not merely aesthetic; they aim to provoke reflection and foster ethical awareness.

Interactive formats also promote intersubjectivity by establishing a dia­logue between user and author through co-creation, and cultivate delib­erative rhetoric to encourage civic discourse around social and ethical challenges [84]. Community-building emerges through participatory content generation [82], while personalisation strengthens a sense of shared meaning and moral responsibility [85], positioning the user as an engaged and accountable actor in the narrative process.

Gamification – the integration of game elements into non-game contexts – has become an increasingly influential tool in contemporary journalism. Beyond enhancing user engagement, it fosters critical reflection and personal investment in socially relevant themes. Rhetorical devices such as choice, consequence, narrative structure, and personalisation shape users’ perceptions and deepen their involvement with the content [see reference 59]; [83]; [85].

Prominent examples include “Desencanto” by Cuestión Pública in Colombia [86], which positions users as detectives solving political and social cases, and “Do Not Track” [87] – an interactive web series on digital privacy, where personal data become part of the story. [52] Ukraine’s Digital Space and Bulgaria’s You Are in Danger similarly engage users in exploring digital rights and public safety, allowing them to navigate ethical dilemmas through simulated choices [see reference 51; 82]. These projects demonstrate gamification’s rhetorical and ethical capacity to transform audiences from passive consumers into active co-creators of civic narratives.

An analysis of rhetorical game elements within journalistic projects reveals that gamification in journalism not only enhances audience engagement but also encourages deeper reflection on the issues presented. The element of choice granted to the user allows for an active role in shaping the narrative, thereby fostering a heightened sense of personal responsibility for decisions made and their consequences. A key component of such projects is the storyline, which is often grounded in real social and political issues that demand critical considera­tion. The outcomes of the user’s decisions cultivate a sense of agency in addressing these problems, promoting the development of critical thinking and ethical reflection.

The personalisation of experience – enabled through the user’s individual choices – renders each interaction unique, thereby deepening the user’s immersion in the topics explored. Gamified projects such as “Desencanto” [86] and “Do Not Track”. [87] illustrate how interactive content can shift audience attitudes towards vital social concerns, including digital privacy and the ethics of online surveillance. This demonstrates the powerful potential of gamification as a tool for nurturing socially responsible citizens.

Gamification has been increasingly adopted within journalism to strength­en media literacy, stimulate civic participation, and sustain user engagement. Comparative examples illustrate diverse strategies, mechanics, and rhetorical techniques across cultural and political contexts.

“NewsHero” [88] (Austria) applies a mobile quiz format where users classify true and false news, relying on informative gameplay, levels, and scores to foster news literacy while balancing depth against engagement. “gaMEfy” [76] (Bulgaria) introduces role-based educational modules and teamwork challenges within media contexts, combining civic rhetoric with adaptability to varied political settings. “Do Not Track” (Canada–France), an interactive do­cuseries, situates data privacy as lived experience through real-time tracking, mobilising pathos and reflexivity, yet raising questions of consent and data ethics.

“Desencanto” (Colombia) adopts a detective simulation in which players investigate and alter outcomes; adaptive content and problem-solving gameplay are linked to logos-driven persuasion, though outcome ethics remain a challenge. “The Open Data Newsroom” [89] (Denmark) integrates role-playing and collabo­rative inquiry into environmental investigations using open data, foregrounding civic rhetoric and public speaking, while confronting tensions between respon­sibility and sensationalism. “Vox Populi” (EU) employs com­petitive ranking systems to drive civic expression, but risks gamified pop­ulism.

“Décodex” [90] (France) functions as a training game for disinformation detection, deploying badges, hints, and leaderboards to reinforce ethos and factual trust. “Times of India Newsgames” [91] (India) frame complex issues through quests, levels, and challenges, aiming at accessibility yet risking sim­plification. “Bad News” [92] (Netherlands) reverses perspective by having players generate disinformation via decision trees, employing irony and meta-rhetoric, though teaching through unethical content remains problematic. Re­gional initiatives such as “Gamification in South Asia” [93] (South Asia) combine local storytelling and mobile-led strategies to promote social engage­ment, while exposing structural inequalities of access.

“Uber Game” [94] (UK) immerses players in financial and moral dilemmas through earnings and decision pathways, linking gameplay to civic reasoning but also exposing gig work precarity. “Go Viral!” [95] (UK) uses viral video dynamics and achievements to simulate misinformation spread, employing reflective irony yet risking trivialisation. “Manipulator” [96] (Ukraine) engages users in logic-based pattern recognition to expose media manipulation, and “Fakeeater” (Ukraine) applies humour and patriotic motivation in debunking exercises, though both face the challenge of oversimplification.

Several projects in the United States further illustrate the breadth of approaches. “NewsFeed Defenders” [97] (USA) simulates social media dy­namics through missions and badges, deploying participatory rhetoric but risking polarisation. “Whitewash” [[98]; [[98] (USA) gamifies the FOIA process as investigative play, highlighting transparency while raising concerns of data misuse. “This Is Not a Game” [100] (USA) incentivises voter participation via quizzes and rewards, though electoral manipulation emerges as an ethical concern. “NYT Quizzes” [101] (USA) exemplify infotainment models with trivia on current affairs, sustaining awareness but often at surface level. “Follow the Facts” [102] (USA) offers multiplayer role-play with reputation scoring and feedback mechanisms, promoting empathy and perspective-taking while also confronting fact-checking and bias challenges.

Taken collectively, these initiatives demonstrate how gamification can enrich journalism by enhancing literacy, civic awareness, and engagement. At the same time, they reveal significant ethical tensions – ranging from the trivialisa­tion of serious issues and simplification of complex topics to the reinforcement of extrinsic motivations and potential political manipulation.

The integration of game elements into journalism highlights an innovative shift in how information is presented and consumed. These projects exemplify diverse ways in which gamification can enhance critical media skills, reinforce trust in journalism, and transform passive audiences into active media participants. By aligning interactive design with persuasive strategies, gamified journalism not only informs but also empowers users within an increasingly complex information landscape.

Discussion

One of the central threats lies in the manipulative potential that emerges when game-based incentives are used to retain audience attention. Rather than fostering in-depth analysis and critical thinking, users may become immersed in a superficial mode of engagement, driven primarily by emotional responses. In this context, gamification rhetoric may function not as a tool of enlightenment, but as a form of informational control, where the focus shifts from the message itself to the reaction it provokes.

Ethical dilemmas arise when complex or traumatic topics – such as war, genocide, or epidemics – are framed through the lens of gameplay. Such ludic representations risk trivialising the experiences of victims and transforming critical issues into objects of entertainment. [103] Journalism that aspires to retain public trust must exercise particular caution in navigating the boundary between narrative engagement and the aestheticisation of suffering. Moreover, gamifica­tion proves difficult to integrate into editorial workflows. This is due not only to technical barriers but also to the institutional inertia characteristic of many traditional media organisations. The creation of gamified content demands new competencies – ranging from interaction design to scenario modelling – that often fall outside the conventional skill set of journalists. [104] A significant challenge lies in the potential shift of focus from informational depth to participation mechanics. There is a risk that journalism may come to be evaluated not by the substance of its content, but by the degree of “engagement” it generates – thereby undermining its core social function. Thus, while gamification holds promise for enhancing engagement, education, and interaction, it also poses risks of su­perficiality, ethical conflict, and ma­nipulative influence. Its adoption must be grounded in critical reflection and a firm adherence to journalistic standards.

Conclusions

This study has conceptualised gamification as a new rhetorical practice in digital journalism, showing that it extends beyond mere entertainment to function as a strategic and sometimes manipulative form of audience engagement. The shift from classical persuasion to interactive, dialogic communication reflects broader transformations in media culture, where users are no longer passive recipients but active participants. Gamification emerges both as a rhetorical strategy – deliberately designed to foster critical engagement – and as a stratagem, capable of subtly influencing perception and behaviour. Digital journalism, with its multimodal affordances, offers a fitting medium for imple­menting such game-based methods.

The analysis of selected gamified journalism projects demonstrates how narrative structures, interactive choices, and game mechanics can enhance comprehension, emotional involvement, and media literacy. At the same time, the study identifies ethical concerns – such as the distortion of serious topics, exploitation of attention, and potential for manipulation. By proposing a conceptual framework and highlighting rhetorical patterns, this research lays the groundwork for a deeper understanding of gamified journalism. It calls for critical scrutiny and ethical reflection, while also offering discussion prompts to support further academic and professional dialogue on the future of media communication.

Gamification emerges not merely as an engagement tool in digital jour­nalism but as a novel rhetorical form transforming communication between jour­nalists and audiences. It fuses classical rhetorical appeals – logos (data and analysis), ethos (source credibility), and pathos (emotional engagement) – with interactivity inherent to digital environments. This creates a multifaceted rhetori­cal system wherein users actively co-create the narrative rather than passively consume it. Future applications include educational journalism through inter­active courses, conflict journalism via scenario simulations, and infographic quests that foster analytical thinking, vital in an era of information overload and post-truth. However, these advances necessitate clear ethical standards ad­dressing sensitive content boundaries, transparency of game mechanics, and fidelity to factual accuracy without emotional distortion. Gamification redefines journalistic ethics, public trust, and professional responsibility by converting passive consumers into engaged participants, deepening topic immersion, and enhancing trust through openness and user involvement. It represents a new digital journalism rhetoric that integrates logos, ethos, pathos, and interaction, promising growth in education, conflict analysis, and dynamic storytelling for­mats.

References and Notes

  • Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? – A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Waikoloa, HI, USA. 3025–3034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377.
  • Conill, R. F. & Karlsson, M. (2016). The Gamification of Journalism. In H. Gangadharbatla & D. Davis (Eds.), Emerging Research and Trends in Gamifica­tion(pp. 356–383). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-8651-9.ch015.
  • Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011, September). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining “gamification”. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference (pp. 9–15). https://doi.org/ 10.1145/2181037.2181040.
  • Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (2012). For the win: How game thinking can revolutionize your business. Wharton Digital Press, 148.
  • Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., & Ritterfeld, U. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Communication Theory, 14(4), 388–408. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00321.x.
  • Dowling, D. O. (2021). The Gamification of Digital Journalism: Innovation in Journalistic Storytelling. Great Britain. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. 193 p.
  • Foxman, M. (2015). Play the news: Fun and games in digital journalism. Columbia Journalism School. https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/ 63168072-1e9c-44bc-bb51-4c5e7b5c581a/content. Retrieved on05.2025.
  • Plewe, C., & Fürsich, E. (2020). Are you game? Gamification in interactive documentaries and journalism. Media, Culture & Society, 42(1), 145–161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443719855301.
  • Zahorulko, D. I. (2017). Features of implementing gamification in media [Osob­lyvosti vprovadzhennia heimifikatsii v media]. Visnyk Kharkivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni VN Karazina. Seriia: Sotsialni komunikatsii, (11), 52– (In Ukrainian).
  • Zahorulko, D. (2018). Gamified information product in online media: specifics and typology [Heimifikovanyi informatsiinyi produkt v onlain-media: spetsyfika ta typolohiia]. Naukovi zapysky Instytutu zhurnalistyky, (1), 62– (In Ukrainian).
  • Hondiul, O. (2023). Using gaming technologies in media to achieve global sustainable development goals (using the example of the author’s game «Unicorn Media Camp2) [Vykorystannia ihrovykh tekhnolohii v media dlia dosiahnennia hlobalnykh tsilei staloho rozvytku (na prykladi avtorskoi hry «Unicorn Media Camp»)]. Intehrovani komunikatsii, 1 (15), 42– (In Ukrainian).
  • Lebowitz, J., & Klug, C. (2011). Interactive storytelling for video games: A player-centered approach to creating memorable characters and stories. Taylor & Francis, 319.
  • Wardrip-Fruin, N., & Harrigan, P. (Eds.). (2004). First Person: New Media as Story, Performance, and Game. MIT Press,
  • Rogers, R., & McNally, M. (2019). Interactive narratives in journalism: The power of gamification. Journal of Digital Media Studies, 15(2), 85–98.
  • Sinha, A. (2024). Digital Journalism’s Gamification: New Approaches to Journalistic Animated Storytelling. In: Dahiya, S., Trehan, K. (eds). Handbook of Digital Journalism. Springer, Singapore. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6675-2_28.
  • Germanakos, P., Belk, M. (2016). Personalization in the Digital Era. In: Human-Centred Web Adaptation and Personalization. Human–Computer Interaction Series. Springer, Cham. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28050-9_1.
  • Larsen, B.A., Schoenau-Fog, H. (2016). The Narrative Quality of Game Mechanics. In: Nack, F., Gordon, A. (eds) Interactive Storytelling. ICIDS 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 10045. Springer, Cham. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48279-8_6.
  • Page, B. (1999). Hamlet on the holodeck: The future of narrative in cyberspace. MFS Modern Fiction Studies, 45(2), 553–556.
  • Oke, T. (2025). Algorithmic narrativity as a new narrative mode. AI & Soc. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02297-8.
  • Steensen, S., Ferrer-Conill, R., & Peters, C. (2020). (Against a) theory of audience engagement with news. Journalism Studies, 21(12), 1662–1680. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1788414.
  • Treanor, M., Schweizer, B., Bogost, I., & Mateas, M. (2011, June). Proceduralist Readings: How to find meaning in games with graphical logics. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Foundations of Digital Games, 115–122. https://expressiveintelligence.github.io/papers/ProceduralistReadings.pdf. Ret­rieved on 10.06.2025.
  • Dubbelman, T. (2016). Narrative game mechanics. In: Nack, F., Gordon, A. (eds) Interactive Storytelling. ICIDS 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 10045. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48279-8_4.
  • Greig (Lennox), M. (2023). Mechanical meaning: The relationship between game mechanics and story in ergodic theatre. Convergence, 31(1), 69–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565231193120 (Original work published 2025).
  • Chen, L., Dowling, D., & Goetz, C. (2023). At the nexus of ludology and narra­tology: Advances in reality-based story-driven games. F1000Research, 12, 45. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.129113.1.
  • Luhova, Т. (2020). Narrative and storytelling in the knowledge structure of an educational and business video game as factors of synergy between information technologies and spiritually oriented pedagogy.Open educational e-environment of a modern University, (8), 42–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28925/2414-0325. 2020.8.6 (in Ukrainian).
  • Zinovieva, T. (2024). The art of war: examining the visual narratives of Ukrainian video games. Eastern Journal of European Studies, 15(SI), 317–339. https:// doi.org/10.47743/ejes-2024-SI15.
  • Couldry, N. (2012). Media, society, world: Social theory and digital media practice. Polity Press, 311.
  • Bogost, I. (2011). How to do things with videogames. University of Minnesota Press,
  • Rettberg, W. J. (2014). Seeing ourselves through technology: How we use selfies, blogs and wearable devices to see and shape ourselves. Springer Nature, 101. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/27826/1/1002179.pdf. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Rettberg, S., & Rettberg, J. W. (2024). Algorithmic narrativity: Literary experiments that drive technology. Dialogues on Digital Society, 1(1), 37–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/29768640241255848 (Original work published 2025).
  • Zimmerman, E. (2004). Narrative, interactivity, play, and games: Four naughty concepts in need of discipline. In N. Wardrip-Fruin & P. Harrigan (Eds.), First person: New media as story, performance, and game, MIT Press. 154–164. https://www.anabiosispress.org/VM606/1stPerson_ezimmerman.pdf. Retrieved on 11.05.2025.
  • Zinovieva, T. (2024). Immersive Journalism: Trust Issues in the Post-truth Era and War. Rhetoric and Communications (60), 87–117.
  • Luhova, T. (2021). Journalism education based on serious games. Electronic Scientific Professional Journal “Open Educational E-Environment Of Modern University”, (11), 92–105. https://doi.org/10.28925/2414-0325.2021.118. Retrieved on 11.05.2025.
  • Luhova, T. A. (2021). Game-design-oriented approach to development of educational disciplins of higher educational institutions. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 81(1), 235–254. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v81i1.3265 (in Ukrainian).
  • Zinovieva, T. (2023). War in Ukraine through the lens of interactive media: A typological study of video games. Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 2(21), 213–229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36874/RIESW.2023.2.11.
  • McQuail, D. (2010). McQuail’s mass communication theory (6th ed.). Sage Publications, 534.
  • Salen, K., & Zimmerman (2003). Rules of Play: Game Design Funda­mentalsby Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, U.S.A., 670.
  • Caillois, R. (2001). Man, play and games (M. Barash, Trans.). University of Illinois Press,
  • Huizinga, J. (1955). Homo Ludens: A study of the play-element in culture. Beacon Press,
  • Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00355.x.
  • Aristotle. (2007). On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse (G. A. Kennedy, Trans., 2nd ed.). Oxford University Press, 337.
  • Fortenbaugh, W. W. (2007). Aristotle’s Art of Rhetoric. A companion to Greek rhetoric, 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470997161.ch9.
  • McQuail, D. (1992) Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest, pp. 237–73. London: Sage. (Part VII on mass media, order and social control).
  • Domingo, D., Heinonen, A., Paulussen, S., Quandt, T., Singer, J. B., & Vujnovic, M. (2008). Participatory journalism practices in the media and beyond. Journalism Practice, 2(3), 326–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512780802281065.
  • Hermida, A. (2010). Twittering the news: The emergence of ambient journalism. Journalism Practice, 4(3), 297–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512781003640703.
  • Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility (pp. 73–100). MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/doi: 10.1162/dmal.9780262562324.073.
  • Richardson, J. E. (2017). Analysing newspapers: An approach from critical discourse analysis. Bloomsbury Publishing,
  • Balandina, N., & Zinovieva, T. (2024). Media environment in the mirror of language innovations. European Science, 89–114. DOI: 10.30890/2709-2313.2024-26-00-022.
  • Pavlik, J. V. (2013). Innovation and the future of journalism. Digital Journalism, 1(2), 181–193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2012.756666.
  • Wojdynski, B. W. (2016). Games and quizzes in online journalism: Reaching users via interactivity and customization. In Emerging research and trends in gamification(pp. 329–355). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. DOI: 4018/978-1-4666-8651-9.ch014.
  • Bogost, I. (2010). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England. MIT Press,
  • Murray, J. H. (1997). Hamlet on the holodeck: The future of narrative in cy­berspace. The Free Press, 324.
  • Uskali, T., & Ikonen, P. (2020). The impact of emotions in immersive journalism. In A. G. Turo Uskali (Ed.), Immersive journalism as storytelling: ethics, production, and design. London; New York: Routledge, 49–60.
  • Kyrylova, О. (2017). Immersive journalism: the experience of world news sources. Dnipropetrovsk University Bulletin: Social Communications, 25(12), 51–57.
  • Luhova, T., & Kolot, S. (2023, September). Emotional intelligence model in educational computer games. In 2023 IEEE 12th international conference on intelligent data acquisition and advanced computing systems: technology and applications (IDAACS). 1, IEEE. 846–852. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ IDAACS58523.2023.10348740.
  • Anderson, C. A., & Dill, K. E. (2000). Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(4), 772–790. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.772.
  • De Freitas, S. (2006). Learning in immersive worlds: A review of game-based learning. JISC.
  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.
  • Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 1(1), 20–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/ 950566.950595.
  • Jodłowiec, M. (2023). Deceptive clickbaits in the relevance-theoretic lens: What makes them similar to punchlines. Pragmatics, 33(3), 418–435. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1075/prag.22003.jod.
  • Morales Sánchez, M. I., & Martín Villarreal, J. P. (2019). Double-click rhetoric: rhetorical strategies of communication in the digital context. Res Rhetorica, 6 (1) 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29107/rr2019.1.1.
  • Pengnate, S. (2019). Shocking secret you won’t believe! Emotional arousal in clickbait headlines: An eye-tracking analysis. Online Information Review, 43(7), 1136–1150. DOI: https://doi.org/1108/OIR-05-2018-0172.
  • Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by Design: Imple­menting Game Mechanics in Web and Mobile Apps. O’Reilly Media, 182.
  • Fogg, B. J. (2003). Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. 1–282 p. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/B978-1-55860-643-2. X5000-8.
  • Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media colli New York, NY: New, 1–2.
  • Artemenko, A. P., Artemenko, Ya. I., & Popova, N. V. (2011). Rhetorical strategems in identity discourse [Rytorychni stratehemy v dyskursi identychnosti]. Visnyk Kharkivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu im. VN Karazina. Ceriia «Filo­sofiia. Filosofski perypetii». Kharkiv, (984), 109–117. Rhetorical strategems in iden­tity discourse. (In Ukrainian).
  • Kim, T. W., & Werbach, K. (2016). More than just a game: ethical issues in gamification. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(2), 157–
  • Conill, R. F. (2016). Points, badges, and news. A study of the introduction of gamification into journalism practice. Comunicació: revista de recerca i d’anàlisi, 45– https://www.raco.cat/index.php/Comunicacio/article/download/93330/407969. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1991). The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Penguin Books. 247 p.
  • de la Peña, N. (2015). The future of news? Virtual reality. https://www.ted.com/ talks/nonny_de_la_pena_the_future_of_news_virtual_reality. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Bogost, I., Ferrari, S., & Schweizer, B. (2010). Newsgames: Journalism at play. MIT Press.
  • A year of full-scale war [Rik povnomasshtabnoi viiny]. Texty.org.ua. https:// texty.org.ua/projects/109018/rik-vijny/. Retrieved on 25.05.2025.
  • Cagle, S. (2016, November 3). How Voter Fraud Works – and Mostly Doesn’t. ProPublica. https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/voterfraud. Retrieved on 25.05.2025.
  • Syrian Journey: Choose your own escape route. (2015). BBC News. https:// bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32057601. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • FakeGryz is now available for Google Chrome [Feikohryz teper dostupnyi dlia Google Chrome]. 03.12.2019. org.ua. https://texty.org.ua/fragments/98392/ Fejkogryz_teper_dostupnyj_dla_google_chrome-98392/. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Europsky Dialog. gaMEfy – Erasmus+ Strategic Partnership project. https:// eu/en/gamefy/. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Vox Populi (ЄС, 2023): Європейський Союз. (2023). Vox Populi: a platform for civic participation and information verification. https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/ europe_direct/items/878551/en. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Smallbore Webworks. (2009, July 20). Cutthroat Capitalism: The Game. Wired. https://www.wired.com/2009/07/cutthroat-capitalism-the-game/. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Sicart, M. (2011). Against procedurality. Game Studies, 11(3). http:// gamestudies.org/1103/articles/sicart_ap. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Ryan, M.-L. (2001). Narrative as Virtual Reality: Immersion and Interactivity in Literature and Electronic Media. Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore and London, 340.
  • Branch, J. (2012, December 20). Snow Fall: The Avalanche at Tunnel Creek. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/. Retrieved on 25.05.2025.
  • Jenkins, H., Ford, S., & Green, J. (2013). Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture. NYU Press. URL: https://core.ac.uk/ download/pdf/74353509.pdf. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Koenitz, H. (2010). Towards a Theoretical Framework for Interactive Digital Narrative. In: Aylett, R., Lim, M.Y., Louchart, S., Petta, P., Riedl, M. (eds) Interactive Storytelling. ICIDS 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6432. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16638-9_22.
  • Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Beacon Press.
  • Sundar, S. S., & Marathe, S. S. (2010). Personalization versus customization: The importance of agency, privacy, and power usage. Human Communication Research, 36(3), 298–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01377.x.
  • Desencanto: Interactive game. (2023). Cuestión Pública. https:// cuestionpublica.com/juega-desencanto/. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Do Not Track (2015). ARTE, NFB, Upian. https://donottrack-doc.com. Retrieved on 20.05.2025.
  • NewsHero (Austria, A1 Telekom): A1 Telekom. (2020). NewsHero: mobile game for media literacy. https://youtu.be/3hh6Qwm20bQ?si=w8aeRML-BbTNaPSG. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Celis Vargas, A. (2025, April 24). Launching The Open Data Newsroom (a game for developing open data competencies in school). ODECO. URL: https://odeco-research.eu/?p=4703 (accessed: 20.05.2025).
  • Décodex. Le Monde. https://www.lemonde.fr/verification/. Retrieved on 20.05.2025.
  • The Times of India Newsgames: The Times of India. (2020). Newsgames: inter­active games for readers. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/games. Re­trieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Bad News (DROG, Netherlands): DROG. (2019). Bad News: a game for learning how to manipulate news. https://www.gusmanson.nl/en/work/bad-news/; https://www.sdmlab.psychol.cam.ac.uk/research/bad-news-game. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Kwok, (2021, 07 Jun). Gamification in South Asia: South Asia Media Initiative. Gamification in South Asia: digital media and gamification for media literacy. Newmandala. https://www.newmandala.org/gameplay-for-good-gamified-crowdsourcing-for-better-public-policy-in-southeast-asia/. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • The Uber Game (2017). Financial Times. https://ig.ft.com/uber-game/. Retierved on 05.2025.
  • Go Viral! BBC Media Action. https://inoculation.science/inoculation-games/go-viral/. Retierved on05.2025.
  • Manipulator (2018). org.ua. https://texty.org.ua/d/manipulator-game/. Re­trieved on 20.05.2025.
  • NewsFeed Defenders. iCivics. https://www.icivics.org/games/newsfeed-defenders. Retrieved on 20.05.2025.
  • Johnson, (2015). The Gamification of Investigative Journalism at Muck Rock. Mediashift. https://mediashift.org/2015/10/the-gamification-of-investigative-journalism-at-muck-rock/. Retrieved on 15.05.2025.
  • Whitewash (MuckRock): MuckRock. (2021). Whitewash: game based on public information requests. https://github.com/MuckRock/whitewash. Retrieved on 15.05.2025.
  • This Is Not a Game: The Game (Samantha Bee): Bee, S. (2018). This Is Not a Game: The Game: an interactive game to encourage electoral participation. Marieclaire. https://www.marieclaire.com/politics/a23008444/samantha-bee-this-is-not-a-game-app-midterms/. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • News Interactive quiz. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/ spotlight/news-quiz. Retrieved on 20.05.2025.
  • iThrive Games. iThrive Sim: Follow the Facts. iThrive Games Foundation. https://ithrivegames.org/ithrive-sim/follow-the-facts/. Retrieved on 10.05.2025.
  • Sicart, M. (2014). Play matters. MIT Press,
  • García-Avilés, J.A., Ferrer-Conill, R., & García-Ortega, A. (2022). Gamifica­tion and Newsgames as Narrative Innovations in Journalism. In: Vázquez-Herrero, J., Silva-Rodríguez, A., Negreira-Rey, MC., Toural-Bran, C., López-García, X. (eds.) Total Journalism. Studies in Big Data, vol 97. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/ 1007/978-3-030-88028-6_5.

 

Note: Citations and references to scientific publications and other resources are correctly presented in the References and Notes section of the scientific article structure, therefore the bibliography will not be listed separately, given the volume of the text.

 

Zinovieva Tetiana. Ph.D. in Art History, assistant professor of Information Activity and Media Communications Department of Odesa National Polytechnic Univer­sity (Ukraine), Deputy Dean of the Humanities Faculty. Guarantor of the educational and professional program “Journalism” (2022-2025). Basic higher educa­tion – teach­ing, and psychologist in educational institutions. Experience teaching activities in higher education – 20 years. Research interests: game-based learning, gamification of educa­tion, serious games, game design, immersive journalism, deep media, storytelling al­g­o­rithms, visual narrative, knowledge management, spirituality in digital culture, tradi­tional and modern culture, folk creativity, convergent journalism, journalistic ethics.

 

Yakubovska Mariia. Ph.D. Field of Study: Humanities. Programme Subject Area: Philology. Assistant professor of Information Activity and Media Communications Department of Odesa National Polytechnic University (Ukraine). Basic higher educa­tion: Ph.D. of Philology, Master of Arts in Public Administration. Experience teaching activities in higher educational establishments – 21 years. Research interests: rhetoric, journalism, modern literature, management in journalism and advertising, convergent journalism.

Manuscript was submitted: 20.08.2025.

Double Blind Peer Reviews: from 28.08.2025 till 29.09.2025.

Accepted: 30.09.2025.

Брой 65 на сп. „Реторика и комуникации“ (октомври 2025 г.) се издава с финансова­та помощ на Фонд научни изследвания, договор № КП-06-НП6/48 от 04 декември 2024 г.

Issue 65 of the Rhetoric and Communications Journal (October 2025) is published with the financial support of the Scientific Research Fund, Contract No. KP-06-NP6/48 of December 04, 2024.