Public AI imaginaries: How the debate on artificial intelligence was covered in Danish newspapers and magazines 1956–2021

Hansen, Sne Scott

doi:10.2478/nor-2022-0004

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our contribution to sociotechnical imaginaries is analysing the context of law-drafting, which has not received much attention in prior literature focused on media texts (Natale and Ballatore, 2020; Scott Hansen, 2022) and policy analyses (Tidwell and Tidwell, 2018; Tupasela et al 2020). Our approach complements public administration research by its orientation on imagining different potential futures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prior studies demonstrate that imaginaries centre around the unlimited benefits and potential of technological innovations, while risks are seen as manageable (Chan, 2021). Recent studies on the historical development and public imaginaries of AI in the media suggest that imaginaries rely on myths and vague terminology, which create ambiguity and uncertainty (Natale and Ballatore, 2020; Scott Hansen, 2022). Optimism over new technologies seems to prevail, emphasizing efficiency expectations (Lepinkäinen and Malik, 2022).…”

Section: Conceptualizing Imaginaries and Ideals In Prior Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Imaginaries of better administration: Renegotiating the relationship between citizens and digital public power

Esko

Koulu

2023

Big Data & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates future visions of digital public administration as they appear within a particular regulatory process that aims to enable automated decision-making (ADM) in public administration in Finland. By drawing on science and technology studies, public administration studies, and socio-legal studies we analyze law in the making and identify four imaginaries of public digital administration: understandable administration, self-monitoring administration, adaptive administration, and responsible administration. We argue that digital administration is seen from the perspective of public authorities serving their current needs of legitimizing existing automation practices. While technology is pictured as unproblematic, the citizen perspective is missing. We conclude that the absence of an in-depth understanding of the diverse needs of citizens raises the question whether the relationship between public power and citizens is becoming a one-way street despite of the public administration ideals that express values of citizen engagement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conceptualizing Imaginaries and Ideals In Prior Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Imaginaries of better administration: Renegotiating the relationship between citizens and digital public power

Esko

Koulu

2023

Big Data & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since then, the theoretical concept of imaginaries has been applied in a wide range of disciplines (Bouchard, 2017), resulting in variants such as urban imaginaries, tourism imaginaries, environmental imaginaries and educational imaginaries. The application of imaginaries to analyse AI‐augmented futures has also been burgeoning over time (Bory & Bory, 2015; Dobbernack, 2010; Gardner & Wray, 2013; Goode, 2018; Nordmann, 2016), arguably culminating in a certain ‘surge’ in the last year alone (Bareis & Katzenbach, 2022; Hansen, 2022; Paltieli, 2022; Sartori & Bocca, 2022). As expected, and as we shall also see in examples from AIEd, imaginaries range from the obviously optimistic to the highly pessimistic but often also end up downplaying the potential effects behind an assumed technical neutrality.…”

Section: Imaginariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaginaries and problematisations: A heuristic lens in the age of artificial intelligence in education

Rahm

Rahm‐Skågeby

2023

Brit J Educational Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper suggests that artificial intelligence in education (AIEd) can be fruitfully analysed as ‘policies frozen in silicon’. This means that they exist as both materialised and proposed problematisations (problem representations with corresponding solutions). As a theoretical and analytical response, this paper puts forward a heuristic lens that can provide insights into how AI technologies (or advocated AI technologies) function as proposed solutions to certain problematisations based on various imaginaries about how education and learning are best performed or supported. The combined reading of imaginaries and problematisations can thereby aid in our understanding of why and how visions of learning and education are framed in relation to AIEd developments. The overall ambition is to advance theoretical and analytical approaches towards an educational system which is (anticipated as) increasingly permeated by AI systems—systems that also support and implement, more or less, invisible models, standards and assessments of learning, as well as more grand visions of (technology‐augmented) education in society. Practitioner notesWhat is already known about this topic Artificial intelligence in education (AIEd) is repeatedly presented as a solution for a range of educational ‘problems’. This means that such ‘solutions’ must also frame certain aspects as ‘problems’. Such problems and ‘solutions’ (problematisations) also exist within certain imaginaries of the present times and of the future, where these problematisations are presented as particularly significant and acute, and promoting specific anticipations of learning and ideals of education. What this paper adds An exposition of problematisations in educational settings. An exposition of educational imaginaries. A heuristic lens for understanding the ‘present’ and ‘future’ in a particular imaginary as entangled in, and dependent on, a certain ‘past’. Implications for practice and/or policy The approach presented in this paper provides a heuristic lens for examining how AI technologies (or advocated AI technologies) function as proposed solutions to problematisations based on imaginaries about how education and learning are best performed or supported. This aids our understanding of how and why certain visions of learning and education are framed in relation to AIEd developments (real or imagined). It also advances theoretical and analytical approaches towards an educational system, which is (anticipated as) increasingly permeated by AI systems—systems that also support and implement, more or less, invisible models, standards and assessments of learning, as well as more grand visions of (technology‐augmented) education in society.

show abstract

“…Bory, 2019; Sadowski and Bendor, 2019) and press and magazine articles (e.g. Johanssen and Wang, 2021; Scott Hansen, 2022). What is lacking, however, is an empirically based understanding of how different imaginaries are mobilized by users who interact with and discuss AI technologies.…”

Section: Ai and Gender Imaginariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, while extensive research has unveiled how AI imaginaries are constructed in public arena such as news media (e.g. Scott Hansen, 2022) or policy documents (e.g. Mager and Katzenbach, 2021), very little empirical research has explored how users construct AI imaginaries by drawing on their own experiences with these technologies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ideal technologies, ideal women: AI and gender imaginaries in Redditors’ discussions on the Replika bot girlfriend

Depounti

Saukko

Natale

2022

Media, Culture & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is extensive literature on how expectations and imaginaries about artificial intelligence (AI) guide media and policy discussions. However, it has not been considered how such imaginaries are activated when users interact with AI technologies. We present findings of a study on how users on a subreddit discussed ‘training’ their Replika bot girlfriend. The discussions featured two discursive themes that focused on the AI imaginary of ideal technology and the gendered imaginary of the ideal bot girlfriend. Users expected their AI Replikas to both be customizable to serve their needs and to have a human-like or sassy mind of their own and not spit out machine-like answers. Users thus projected dominant notions of male control over technology and women, mixed with AI and postfeminist fantasies of ostensible independence onto the interactional agents and activated similar scripts embedded in the devices. The vicious feedback loop consolidated dominant scripts on gender and technology whilst appearing novel and created by users. While most research on the use of AI is conducted in applied computer science to improve user experience, this article outlines a media and cultural studies lens for a critical understanding of these emerging technologies as they become embedded in communication and meaning-making.

show abstract

Public AI imaginaries: How the debate on artificial intelligence was covered in Danish newspapers and magazines 1956–2021

Cited by 14 publications

References 34 publications

Imaginaries of better administration: Renegotiating the relationship between citizens and digital public power

Imaginaries of better administration: Renegotiating the relationship between citizens and digital public power

Imaginaries and problematisations: A heuristic lens in the age of artificial intelligence in education

Ideal technologies, ideal women: AI and gender imaginaries in Redditors’ discussions on the Replika bot girlfriend

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About