Generative AI as Digital Media

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.06523v1
• Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2025 08:58:17 GMT
• Title: Generative AI as Digital Media
• Authors: Gilad Abiri,
• Abstract summary: Generative AI is frequently portrayed as revolutionary or even apocalyptic.<n>This essay argues that such views are misguided.<n>Instead, generative AI should be understood as an evolutionary step in the broader algorithmic media landscape.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative AI is frequently portrayed as revolutionary or even apocalyptic, prompting calls for novel regulatory approaches. This essay argues that such views are misguided. Instead, generative AI should be understood as an evolutionary step in the broader algorithmic media landscape, alongside search engines and social media. Like these platforms, generative AI centralizes information control, relies on complex algorithms to shape content, and extensively uses user data, thus perpetuating common problems: unchecked corporate power, echo chambers, and weakened traditional gatekeepers. Regulation should therefore share a consistent objective: ensuring media institutions remain trustworthy. Without trust, public discourse risks fragmenting into isolated communities dominated by comforting, tribal beliefs -- a threat intensified by generative AI's capacity to bypass gatekeepers and personalize truth. Current governance frameworks, such as the EU's AI Act and the US Executive Order 14110, emphasize reactive risk mitigation, addressing measurable threats like national security, public health, and algorithmic bias. While effective for novel technological risks, this reactive approach fails to adequately address broader issues of trust and legitimacy inherent to digital media. Proactive regulation fostering transparency, accountability, and public confidence is essential. Viewing generative AI exclusively as revolutionary risks repeating past regulatory failures that left social media and search engines insufficiently regulated. Instead, regulation must proactively shape an algorithmic media environment serving the public good, supporting quality information and robust civic discourse.

Related papers

• Public Opinion and The Rise of Digital Minds: Perceived Risk, Trust, and Regulation Support [4.982210700018631]
  This study examines how public trust in institutions and AI technologies, along with perceived risks, shape preferences for AI regulation. Individuals with higher trust in government favor regulation, while those with greater trust in AI companies and AI technologies are less inclined to support restrictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-30T17:56:23Z)
• Do LLMs trust AI regulation? Emerging behaviour of game-theoretic LLM agents [61.132523071109354]
  This paper investigates the interplay between AI developers, regulators and users, modelling their strategic choices under different regulatory scenarios. Our research identifies emerging behaviours of strategic AI agents, which tend to adopt more "pessimistic" stances than pure game-theoretic agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T15:41:21Z)
• From Trust to Truth: Actionable policies for the use of AI in fact-checking in Germany and Ukraine [0.081585306387285]
  The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents unprecedented opportunities and challenges for journalism, fact-checking and media regulation. While AI offers tools to combat disinformation and enhance media practices, its unregulated use and associated risks necessitate clear policies and collaborative efforts. This policy paper explores the implications of AI for journalism and fact-checking, with a focus on addressing disinformation and fostering responsible AI integration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-24T14:34:00Z)
• Media and responsible AI governance: a game-theoretic and LLM analysis [61.132523071109354]
  This paper investigates the interplay between AI developers, regulators, users, and the media in fostering trustworthy AI systems. Using evolutionary game theory and large language models (LLMs), we model the strategic interactions among these actors under different regulatory regimes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T21:39:38Z)
• Transparency, Security, and Workplace Training & Awareness in the Age of Generative AI [0.0]
  As AI technologies advance, ethical considerations, transparency, data privacy, and their impact on human labor intersect with the drive for innovation and efficiency.<n>Our research explores publicly accessible large language models (LLMs) that often operate on the periphery, away from mainstream scrutiny.<n>Specifically, we examine Gab AI, a platform that centers around unrestricted communication and privacy, allowing users to interact freely without censorship.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-19T17:40:58Z)
• Generative AI regulation can learn from social media regulation [0.0]
  I argue that the debates on generative AI regulation can be informed by the debates and evidence on social media regulation.<n>I compare and contrast the affordances of generative AI and social media to highlight their similarities and differences.<n>I discuss specific policy recommendations based on the evolution of social media and their regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-15T23:00:29Z)
• Towards Responsible AI in Banking: Addressing Bias for Fair Decision-Making [69.44075077934914]
  "Responsible AI" emphasizes the critical nature of addressing biases within the development of a corporate culture. This thesis is structured around three fundamental pillars: understanding bias, mitigating bias, and accounting for bias. In line with open-source principles, we have released Bias On Demand and FairView as accessible Python packages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-13T14:07:09Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)
• Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress [171.05448842016125]
  We describe risks that include large-scale social harms, malicious uses, and irreversible loss of human control over autonomous AI systems. There is a lack of consensus about how exactly such risks arise, and how to manage them. Present governance initiatives lack the mechanisms and institutions to prevent misuse and recklessness, and barely address autonomous systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T17:59:06Z)
• Regulation and NLP (RegNLP): Taming Large Language Models [51.41095330188972]
  We argue how NLP research can benefit from proximity to regulatory studies and adjacent fields. We advocate for the development of a new multidisciplinary research space on regulation and NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T09:22:40Z)
• Factuality Challenges in the Era of Large Language Models [113.3282633305118]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) generate false, erroneous, or misleading content. LLMs can be exploited for malicious applications. This poses a significant challenge to society in terms of the potential deception of users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-08T14:55:02Z)
• Dual Governance: The intersection of centralized regulation and crowdsourced safety mechanisms for Generative AI [1.2691047660244335]
  Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) has seen mainstream adoption lately, especially in the form of consumer-facing, open-ended, text and image generating models. The potential for generative AI to displace human creativity and livelihoods has also been under intense scrutiny. Existing and proposed centralized regulations by governments to rein in AI face criticisms such as not having sufficient clarity or uniformity. Decentralized protections via crowdsourced safety tools and mechanisms are a potential alternative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-02T23:25:21Z)
• Bridging the Global Divide in AI Regulation: A Proposal for a Contextual, Coherent, and Commensurable Framework [0.9622882291833615]
  This paper proposes an alternative contextual, coherent, and commensurable (3C) framework for regulating artificial intelligence (AI) To ensure contextuality, the framework bifurcates the AI life cycle into two phases: learning and deployment for specific tasks, instead of defining foundation or general-purpose models. To ensure commensurability, the framework promotes the adoption of international standards for measuring and mitigating risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-20T15:23:40Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.