Abstract
The purpose of this article is to identify the risks, threats, and challenges associated with possible social changes in the processes of digitalization of society and transformations of traditional communication practices, which is associated with the emergence of new digital subjects of mass public communication that form the pseudo structure of digital interaction of people. The primary tasks of the work were to identify the potential of artificial intelligence technologies and neural networks in the field of social and political communications, as well as to analyze the features of “smart” communications in terms of their subjectness. As a methodological optics, the work used the method of discourse analysis of scientific research devoted to the implementation and application of artificial intelligence technologies and self-learning neural networks in the processes of social and political digitalization, as well as the method of critical analysis of current communication practices in the socio-political sphere. At the same time, when analyzing the current digitalization practices, the case study method was used. The authors substantiate the thesis that introducing technological solutions based on artificial intelligence algorithms and self-learning neural networks into contemporary processes of socio-political communication creates the potential for a wide range of challenges, threats, and risks, the key of which is the problem of identifying the actual subjects of digital communication acts. The article also discusses the problem of increasing the manipulative potential of “smart” communications, for which the authors used the concepts of cyber simulacrum and information capsule developed by them. The paper shows that artificial intelligence and self-learning neural network algorithms, being increasingly widely introduced into the current practice of contemporary digital communications, form a high potential for information and communication impact on the mass consciousness from technological solutions that no longer require control by operators – humans. As a result, conditions arise to form a hybrid socio-technical reality – a communication reality of a new type with mixed subjectness. The paper also concludes that in the current practices of social interactions in the digital space, a person faces a new phenomenon – interfaceization, within which self-communication stimulates the universalization and standardization of digital behavior, creating, disseminating, strengthening, and imposing special digital rituals. In the article, the authors suggest that digital rituals blur the line between the activity of digital avatars based on artificial intelligence and the activity of actual people, resulting in the potential for a person to lose his own subjectness in the digital communications space.
Funding
This research has been supported by the Interdisciplinary Scientific and Educational School of Moscow University “Preservation of the World Cultural and Historical Heritage.”
References
Androutsopoulou A., Karacapilidis N., Loukis E., Charalabidis Y. (2019), Transforming the communication between citizens and government through AI-guided chatbots, “Government Information Quarterly”, Vol. 36, No. 2, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.10.001 (26.01.2021).
Aneesh A. (2006), Virtual Migration: The Programming of Globalization, Durham, NC–London.
Baecker R. M. (2019), Computers and Society: Modern Perspectives, Oxford.
Bagdasaryan V. E. (2019), Zagljanut’ za chertu. Iskusstvennyj intellekt i postchelovek: problema cennostnogo programmirovanija, Moskva.
Barber B. (1998), Three Scenarios for the Future of Technology and Strong Democracy, “Political Science Quarterly”, Vol. 113, No. 4, https://doi.org/10.2307/2658245 (26.01.2021).
Barbrook R. (2015), Internet-revoljucija: ot kapitalizma dotkomov k kiberneticheskomu kommunizmu, Moskva.
Bazarkina D., Pashentsev E. (2019), Artificial Intelligence and New Threats to International Psychological Security, “Russia in Global Affairs”, Vol. 17, No. 1, https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6374-2019-17-1-147-170 (26.01.2021).
Beer D. (2017), The social power of algorithms, “Information, Communication & Society”, Vol. 20, No. 1, https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1216147 (20.07.2021).
Bucher T. (2012), Want to be on top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook, “New Media & Society”, Vol. 14, No. 7, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812440159 (20.07.2021).
Bykov I. A. (2020), Iskusstvennyj intellekt kak istochnik politicheskih suzhdenij, “Zhurnal politicheskih issledovanij”, Vol. 4, No. 2, https://doi.org/10.12737/2587-6295-2020-23-33 (26.01.2021).
Daft R .L., Lengel R. H. (1986), Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design, “Management Science”, Vol. 32, No. 5.
Diamond L. (2019), The Road to Digital Unfreedom: The Threat of Postmodern Totalitarianism, “Journal of Democracy”, Vol. 30, No. 1, https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2019.0001 (20.07.2021).
Fedorchenko S. (2020), Fenomen iskusstvennogo intellekta: grazhdanin mezhdu cifrovym avatarom i politicheskim interfejsom, “Zhurnal politicheskih issledovanij”, Vol. 4, No. 2, https://doi.org/10.12737/2587-6295-2020-34-57 (26.01.2021).
Gourley S. (2015), Get ready for the robot propaganda machine, http://www.wired.co.uk/article/robot-propaganda (26.01.2020).
Helmond A. (2015), The platformization of the Web: Making Web Data Platform Ready, “Social Media + Society”, Vol. 1, No. 2, https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2056305115603080 (26.01.2021).
Hildebrandt M. (2018), Algorithmic regulation and the rule of law, “Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences”, Vol. 376, Iss. 2128, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2017.0355 (20.07.2021).
Horowitz M. C., et al. (2018), Artificial intelligence and international security, Center for a New American Security (CNAS), Washington, https://www.cnas.org/publications/reports/artificial-intelligence-and-international-security (26.01.2021).
Howell A. (2011), Madness in international relations: psychology, security, and the global governance of mental health, London.
Isaev I. A. (2019), Tehnologii vlasti. Vlast’ tehnologii, Moskva.
Kamassa M. (2012), Socio-political manipulation – incidental pathology or immanent component of international realm?, “Przegląd Strategiczny”, No. 2.
Kirat D., Jang J., Stoecklin M. (2018), DeepLocker – concealing targeted attacks with AI locksmithing, https://www.blackhat.com/us-18/briefings/schedule/#deeplocker---concealing-targetedattacks-with-ai-locksmithing-11549 (26.01.2021).
Kosinski M. (2021), Facial recognition technology can expose political orientation from naturalistic facial images, “Scientific Reports”, No. 100, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-79310-1 (20.07.2021).
Kosinski M., Stillwella D., Graepel Th. (2013), Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior, “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America”, Vol. 110, No. 15, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218772110 (26.01.2021).
Kostka G. (2019), China’s Social Credit Systems and Public Opinion: Explaining High Levels of Approval, “New Media & Society”, Vol. 21, No. 7, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819826402 (20.07.2021).
Larina E., Ovchinskiy V. (2018), Iskusstvennyj intellekt. Bol’shie dannye. Prestupnost’, Moskva.
Ledyaev V. G. (2001), Vlast’: konceptual’nyj analiz, Moskva.
Lewis M., Yarats D., Dauphin Y. N., Parikh D., Batra Dh. (2017), Deal or No Deal? End-to-End Learning for Negotiation Dialogues, “Proceedings of the 2017. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing”.
Loktionov M. V. (2016), A. A. Bogdanov kak osnovopolozhnik obshhej teorii system, “Filosofija nauki i tehniki”, Vol. 21, No. 2, https://doi.org/10.21146/2413-9084-2016-21-2-80-96 (26.01.2021).
Lovink G. (2016), Social media abyss: critical internet cultures and the force of negation, Cambridge.
Manovich L. (2018), Yazyk novykh media, Moskva.
McQuire S. (2018), Geomedia: setevye goroda i budushchee obshchestvennogo prostranstva, Moskva.
Minsky M. (2018), Soobshhestvo razuma, Moskva.
Neff G., Nagy P. (2016), Talking to Bots: Symbiotic Agency and the Case of Tay, “International Journal of Communication”, Vol. 10, https://doi.org/1932-8036/20160005 (26.01.2021).
Palmer A. (2020), Experts warn digitally-altered ‘deepfakes’ videos of Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and other world leaders could be used to manipulate global politics by 2020, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5492713/Experts-warn-deepfakes-videospoliticians-manipulated.html (26.01.2021).
Pashentsev E. (2019), Zlonamerennoe ispol’zovanie iskusstvennogo intellekta novye ugrozy dlja mezhdunarodnoj informacionno-psihologicheskoj bezopasnosti i puti ih nejtralizacii, “Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie. Jelektronnyj Vestnik”, No. 76, https://doi.org/10.24411/2070-1381-2019-1013 (26.01.2021).
Petrov A., Proncheva O. (2018), Modeling Propaganda Battle: Decision-Making, Homophily, and Echo Chambers, “Artificial Intelligence and Natural Language”, Vol. 930, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01204-5_19 (26.01.2021).
Rodkin P. E. (2016), Media i socium. Tri popytki vskryt’ sub#ekt vlasti: Kriticheskij ocherk, Moskva.
Safronov A. P. (2018), Industrial’nyj avtoritarizm: porjadok social’nogo prinuzhdenija, Moskva.
Srnicek N. (2019), Kapitalizm platform, Moskva.
Suchman L. (2019), Rekonfiguracija otnoshenij chelovek – mashina: plany i situativnye dejstvija, Moskva.
Volodenkov S. V. (2019), Influence of Internet communication technologies on contemporary social and political processes: scenarios, challenges, and actors, “Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes”, No. 5, https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2019.5.16 (26.01.2021).
Waddel K. (2018), The impending war over deepfakes, https://www.axios.com/the-impending-war-over-deepfakes-b3427757-2ed7-4fbc-9edb-45e461eb87ba.html (26.01.2021).
Watson P. J., Jones A. (2013), Google-Berg: Global Elite Transforms Itself for Technocratic Revolution, https://archives.infowars.com/google-berg-global-elite-transforms-itself-for-technocratic-revolution/ (26.01.2021).
Wong K. L. X., Dobson A. S. (2019), We’re Just Data: Exploring China’s Social Credit System in Relation to Digital Platform Ratings Cultures in Westernised Democracies, “Global Media and China”, Vol. 4, No. 2, https://doi.org/10.1177/2059436419856090 (20.07.2021).
Xu Y. (2018), Programmatic Dreams: Technographic Inquiry into Censorship of Chinese Chatbots, “Social Media + Society”, Vol. 4, No. 4, https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118808780 (26.01.2021).
Zandbergen D., Uitermark J. (2020), In Search of the Smart Citizen: Republican and Cybernetic Citizenship in the Smart City, “Urban Studies”, Vol. 57, No. 8, https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098019847410 (20.07.2021).
Zhukov D. S. (2020), Iskusstvennyj intellekt dlja obshhestvenno-gosudarstvennogo organizma: budushhee uzhe startovalo v Kitae, “Zhurnal Politicheskih Issledovanij”, Vol. 4, No. 2.
License
Articles published in "Przegląd Strategiczny" are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. License (CC BY 4.0). They may be copied, redistributed and shared only if appropriate credit is given.