Based in Berlin and Zurich, the NGO AlgorithmWatch is working for a world where algorithms are used to make societies more just, democratic, inclusive and sustainable. Policy Manager Estelle Pannatier warns against the power structures lying behind AI and their impact on access to information.
Algorithm Watch advocates for algorithmic systems that promote human rights. What does this mean regarding AI and the human right to seek and receive information?
Estelle Pannatier: The use of algorithms and Artificial Intelligence poses several challenges to access reliable information. Non-transparent algorithms curate information on social media and search engines in which AI is more and more being integrated. AI-generated content (text, image and video) influences public debate. Furthermore, there is an enormous concentration of market and opinionforming power among a few technology companies providing those services. This affects individuals, who struggle to access reliable information and may withdraw from online debate forums. It also impacts the media and journalism, which are subject to the interests of new gatekeepers, such as AI chatbots, between the media and the public. Furthermore, it impacts society and democracy, as our access to information increasingly depends on a few large companies.
Various models of AI regulations have already appeared worldwide. Do some of them favor more the dissemination of information and quality news for all audiences?
Some AI regulations, such as the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on AI, address the impact of algorithms and AI on human rights and democracy, what is encouraging. However, we observe that AI governance often lacks a comprehensive vision. While it is necessary to set rules for the development and use of AI, a more holistic approach is required. These regulations should indeed also include measures to strengthen the media and journalism, encourage research and the development of alternative platforms and algorithms that promote democracy, and foster democratic competencies in society. Finally, the concentration of market and opinion-shaping power must also be addressed. Only in this way can we guarantee access to reliable, high-quality, diverse information, and encourage constructive public debate.
This piece is taken from the 16th issue of Mediation, titled ‘Information in the age of IA’, which you’ll find attached at the top of this article or here.