This article deals with potential effects of incidental online exposure to political information (IOEP) on the German electorate during the 2017 national election campaign. We argue that the difference in currently unexpected and generally unwanted exposure to political online communication is crucial to the study of IOEP effects. While the former might result in “passive learning,” we hypothesize that–based on psychological reactance theory–the latter may be linked to defensive reactions with undesirable consequences among those who already are alienated from politics. Using cross-sectional data from an online survey among 1100 eligible voters, we can demonstrate that IOEP correlates with reactance in substantial segments. The study’s results are indicating, that the viral character of online campaigning may lead to the opposite of what was intended: voters are not only “trapped,” but might be repelled instead. Further empirical elaboration dealing with causal assumptions is encouraged.

Covering sport mega events is a pivotal strategy for public service broadcasting (PSB) to claim audience support and public legitimacy. However, these mega events are subject to considerable controversy due to their association with doping or corruption. This raises the question for the PSB of how to satisfy the audience of the Olympic Games: by looking closely or by looking away? Conducting two empirical studies, this article investigates how German public service broadcasters reported the sociopolitical problems related to the 2016 Olympic Summer Games and whether the coverage has met the expectations of the audience. The results of a content analysis suggest that a substantial amount of coverage was dedicated to the problematic aspects of the Games. A conjoint analysis shows that German public service broadcasters did not meet the expectations of different audience segments: Neither the core audience nor event-driven spectators and certainly not the outsiders of media sports were fully satisfied by the Olympic program menu of German PSB.

No abstract

Building and implementing ethical AI systems that benefit the whole society is cost-intensive and a multi-faceted task fraught with potential problems. While computer science focuses mostly on the technical questions to mitigate social issues, social science addresses citizens' perceptions to elucidate social and political demands that influence the societal implementation of AI systems. Thus, in this study, we explore the salience of AI issues in the public with an emphasis on ethical criteria to investigate whether it is likely that ethical AI is actively requested by the population. Between May 2020 and April 2021, we conducted 15 surveys asking the German population about the most important AI-related issues (total of N=14,988 respondents). Our results show that the majority of respondents were not concerned with AI at all. However, it can be seen that general interest in AI and a higher educational level are predictive of some engagement with AI. Among those, who reported having thought about AI, specific applications (e.g., autonomous driving) were by far the most mentioned topics. Ethical issues are voiced only by a small subset of citizens with fairness, accountability, and transparency being the least mentioned ones. These have been identified in several ethical guidelines (including the EU Commission's proposal) as key elements for the development of ethical AI. The salience of ethical issues affects the behavioral intentions of citizens in the way that they 1) tend to avoid AI technology and 2) engage in public discussions about AI. We conclude that the low level of ethical implications may pose a serious problem for the actual implementation of ethical AI for the Common Good and emphasize that those who are presumably most affected by ethical issues of AI are especially unaware of ethical risks. Yet, once ethical AI is top of the mind, there is some potential for activism.