In November 2022, the tech company OpenAI launched a groundbreaking chatbot model, ChatGPT. This unprecedented chatbot, characterized by an ease of use for lay internet users, gained immediate popularity and attracted extensive media attention. This article examines global press coverage of ChatGPT in peak reporting dates over the first full year of its existence. Based on a qualitative holistic narrative analysis, our findings point to two narrated scapes of political fear in the coverage of ChatGPT: The fear of the machine and the fear of the human. These attest to the collective imagining of an intensified future, where post-humanist interaction with political information is associated with exploitation, propaganda, and polarization of existing political rifts. We draw on the case study to articulate journalists’ role in signaling instability in the current political media ecosystem, and their construction of a techno-moral framework for society. We discuss an important blind-spot in journalists’ fulfilment of their normative role in fostering technology-informed citizens globally.
AltaySNielsenRKFletcherR (2022) Quantifying the “infodemic”: People turned to trustworthy news outlets during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media2: 1–29.
2.
BalKB (2009) Towards an analysis of opinions in news editorials: How positive was the year? In: Proceedings of the Eight International Conference on Computational Semantics (ed Bunt H, Petukhova V and Wubben S), Tilburg, The Netherlands, 7–9 January 2009, pp. 260–263. Tilburg: Association for Computational Linguistics.
3.
BloombergLDVolpeM (2008) Completing Your Qualitative Dissertation: A Road Map From Beginning to End. New York: Sage.
4.
BrennenJSHowardPNNielsenRK (2022) What to expect when you’re expecting robots: Futures, expectations, and pseudo-artificial general intelligence in UK news. Journalism23(1): 22–38.
5.
CacciatoreMAAndersonAAChoiDH, et al. (2012) Coverage of emerging technologies: A comparison between print and online media. New Media & Society14(6): 1039–1059.
CahaneAShwartz AltshulerT (2023) Human, Machine, State: Toward the Regulation of Artificial Intelligence. Jerusalem: Israel Democracy Institute [Hebrew].
8.
CareyJW (1989) Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society. London: Routledge.
9.
CaveSDihalK (2023) Imagining AI: How the World Sees Intelligent Machines. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
10.
ChesneyBCitronD (2019) Deep fakes: A looming challenge for privacy, democracy, and national security. California Law Review107: 1753–1820.
11.
CohenJTsfatiYSheaferT (2008) The influence of presumed media influence in politics: Do politicians’ perceptions of media power matter?Public Opinion Quarterly72(2): 331–344.
12.
CrowDA (2012) Policy diffusion and innovation: Media and experts in Colorado recreational water rights. Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research4(1): 27–41.
DonovanKP (2015) The Biometric imaginary: Bureaucratic technopolitics in post-apartheid welfare. Journal of Southern African Studies41(4): 815–833.
15.
EntmanRM (1993) Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication43(4): 51–58.
16.
FerrariE (2020) Technocracy meets populism: The dominant technological imaginary of Silicon Valley. Communication, Culture and Critique13(1): 121–124.
17.
FerreeMMGamsonWAGerhardsJ, et al (2002) Shaping Abortion Discourse: Democracy and the Public Sphere in Germany and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
FlichyP (2007) The Internet Imaginaire. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
19.
GamsonW (2004) Bystanders, public opinion and the media. In: SnowDAHouleSAKriesiH (eds) The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, pp.242–261.
20.
GorwaRGuilbeaultD (2020) Unpacking the social media bot: A typology to guide research and policy. Policy & Internet12(2): 225–248.
21.
GreenbergJHierS (2009) CCTV surveillance and the poverty of media discourse: A content analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage. Canadian Journal of Communication34(3): 451–486.
22.
GrigsbyA (2017) The end of cyber norms. Survival59(6): 109–122.
23.
GuoBZhangXWangZ, et al. (2023) How close is chatgpt to human experts? comparison corpus, evaluation, and detection. Epub ahead of print 18 January 2023. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2301.07597.
24.
IencaM (2023) On artificial intelligence and manipulation. Topoi42: 833–842.
25.
IyengarSKinderDR (2010) News That Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26.
JaworskiAFitzgeraldRMorrisD (2003) Certainty and speculation in news reporting of the future: the execution of Timothy McVeigh. Discourse Studies5(1): 33–48.
27.
KalpokasI (2019) Affective encounters of the algorithmic kind: post-truth and posthuman pleasure. Social Media+ Society5(2): 1–12.
28.
Latzko-TothGBonneauCMilletteM (2017) Small Data, thick data: Thickening strategies for trace-based social media research. In: SloanLQuan-HaaseA (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp.199–214.
29.
LieblichATuval-MashiachRZilberT (1998) Narrative Research: Reading, Analysis, and Interpretation. New York: Sage.
MagerAKatzenbachC (2021) Future imaginaries in the making and governing of digital technology: Multiple, contested, commodified. New Media & Society23(2): 223–236.
32.
MarchantGE (2011) The Growing Gap Between Emerging Technologies and the Law. In: MarchantGAllenbyBHerkertJ (eds) The Growing Gap Between Emerging Technologies and Legal-Ethical Oversight. The International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology, vol 7. Dordrecht: Springer, pp.19–33.
33.
MarcianoA (2019) The discursive construction of biometric surveillance in the Israeli press: Nationality, citizenship, and democracy. Journalism Studies20(7): 972–990.
34.
McCombsM (2005) A look at agenda-setting: Past, present and future. Journalism Studies6(4): 543–557.
35.
MishlerEG (1986) The analysis of interview-narratives. In: SarbinTR (ed.) Narrative Psychology. Westport: Praeger, pp.233–255.
36.
Muñoz SaldañaMAzurmendi AdarragaA (2018) Public service media and multilevel governance citizen participation in the networked society – the Spanish case. In: Ferrell LoweGvan Den BulkHDondersK (eds) Public Service Media in the Networked Society RIPE 2017. Gothenburg: Nordicom, pp.143–158.
37.
NataleSGuzmanAL (2022) Reclaiming the human in machine cultures: Introduction. Media, Culture & Society44(4): 627–637.
38.
NeigerM (2007) Media oracles: The cultural significance and political import of news referring to future events. Journalism8(3): 309-321.
39.
NiemiMKPitkänenV (2017) Gendered use of experts in the media: Analysis of the gender gap in Finnish news journalism. Public Understanding of Science26(3): 355–368.
40.
NisbetMCHugeM (2006) Attention cycles and frames in the plant biotechnology debate: Managing power and participation through the press/policy connection. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics11(2): 3–40.
41.
NisbetMCLewensteinBV (2002) Biotechnology and the American media: The policy process and the elite press, 1970 to 1999. Science Communication23(4): 359–391.
42.
ObozintsevL (2018) From SKYNET to SIRI: An exploration of the nature and effects of media coverage of artificial intelligence. MA Thesis, University of Delaware.
43.
PepperellR (1995) The Post-Human Condition. Bristol: Intellect Books.
44.
PrunklCEAshurstCAnderljungM, et al. (2021) Institutionalizing ethics in AI through broader impact requirements. Nature Machine Intelligence3(2): 104–110.
45.
RichterVKatzenbachCSchäferMS (2023) Imaginaries of artificial intelligence. In LindgrenS. (Ed.), Handbook of Critical Studies of Artificial Intelligence. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp.209–223.
46.
RoeJPerkinsM (2023) ‘What they’re not telling you about ChatGPT’: exploring the discourse of AI in UK news media headlines. Humanities and social sciences communications10(1): 1–9.
47.
RomeleA (2023) Digital Habitus: A Critique of the Imaginaries of Artificial Intelligence. London: Routledge.
48.
ScheufeleDATewksburyD (2007) Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication57(1): 9–20.
49.
SchiaNNGjesvikL (2020) Hacking democracy: Managing influence campaigns and disinformation in the digital age. Journal of Cyber Policy5(3): 413–428.
50.
SegessenmannJStadelmannTDavisonA, et al. (2023) Assessing deep learning: A work program for the humanities in the age of artificial intelligence. AI and Ethics. Epub ahead of print 21December2023. DOI: 10.1007/s43681-023-00408-z.
51.
ShaikhSJMoranRE (2022) Recognize the bias? News media partisanship shapes the coverage of facial recognition technology in the United States. New Media & Society26(5): 2829–2850.
52.
ShihTJWijayaRBrossardD (2008) Media coverage of public health epidemics: Linking framing and issue attention cycle toward an integrated theory of print news coverage of epidemics. Mass Communication & Society11(2): 141–160.
53.
SimchonAEdwardsMLewandowskyS (2023) The persuasive effects of political microtargeting in the age of generative AI. PNAS Nexus3(2).
SrivastavaS (2012) Pessimistic side of information & communication technology: Cyber bullying and legislature laws. International Journal of Advances in Computer Science and Technology1(1): 14–20.
56.
StrömbäckJNegrineRHopmannDN, et al. (2013) Sourcing the news: Comparing source use and media framing of the 2009 European parliamentary elections. Journal of Political Marketin12(1): 29–52.
57.
UebersaxJS (1987) Diversity of decision-making models and the measurement of interrater agreement. Psychological Bulletin101(1): 140–146.
58.
VosoughiSRoyDAralS (2018) The spread of true and false news online. Science359(6380): 1146–1151.
WirtzBWWeyererJCKehlI (2022) Governance of artificial intelligence: A risk and guideline-based integrative framework. Government Information Quarterly39(4): 101685.
61.
YadlinAMarcianoA (2022) COVID-19 surveillance in Israeli press: Spatiality, mobility, and control. Mobile Media & Communication10(3): 421–447.
62.
Yadlin-SegalAOppenheimY (2021) Whose dystopia is it anyway? Deepfakes and social media regulation. Convergence27(1): 36–51.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
