Recent works in sociology have addressed the social embeddedness of AI artifacts and their impact on social and cultural life. However, media discourse has remained an invisible backdrop in relevant analyses. Little is known about how AI technologies are collectively interpreted as revolutionary or how public policy interacts with the sociotechnical imaginaries produced and sustained in mass-media representations. Merging frameworks from Critical Discourse Analysis and Cultural Sociology, this study employs a discourse analysis approach focused on analogies to elucidate the construction of ChatGPT’s revolutionary nature in the United States’ media discourse. It posits that sociotechnical systems’ qualities should not be conceived merely as ontic and independent of their linguistically mediated representations. Although customarily linked to legitimation through moral evaluation in the literature of discourse studies, this study demonstrates that analogical comparisons in the public arena encompass multiple strategies that legitimize ChatGPT’s sociocultural significance, thereby influencing the trajectory of institutional action.
AbbottAD (2001) Time Matters: On Theory and Method. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
2.
AlexanderJC (1990) The sacred and profane information machine: Discourse about the computer as ideology. Archives de Sciences Sociales Des Religions35(69): 161–171.
3.
AlexanderJC (2002) On the social construction of moral universals: The “Holocaust” from war crime to trauma drama. European Journal of Social Theory5(1): 5–85.
4.
AlexanderJC (2003) The Meanings of Social Life: A Cultural Sociology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
5.
AlexanderJC (2016) Culture trauma, morality and solidarity: The social construction of ‘Holocaust’ and other mass murders. Thesis Eleven132(1): 3–16.
6.
AlexanderJC (2018) The societalization of social problems: Church pedophilia, phone hacking, and the financial crisis. American Sociological Review83(6): 1049–1078.
7.
AlexanderJCEyermanRSmelserNJ, et al (2004) Cultural Trauma and Collective Identity. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
8.
AliSAbuhmedTEl-SappaghS, et al (2023) Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): What we know and what is left to attain Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence. Information Fusion99: 101805.
9.
BartschANeubergerCStarkB, et al (2025) Epistemic authority in the digital public sphere. An integrative conceptual framework and research agenda. Communication Theory35(1): 37–50.
10.
BlumerH (1971) Social problems as collective behavior. Social Problems18(3): 298–306.
11.
BurrellJ (2016) How the machine ‘thinks’: Understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data & Society3(1): 1–12.
12.
BurrellJFourcadeM (2021) The society of algorithms. Annual Review of Sociology47(1): 213–237.
13.
ChristensenLTCornelissenJ (2015) Organizational transparency as myth and metaphor. European Journal of Social Theory18(2): 132–149.
14.
CoeckelberghM (2020) AI, responsibility attribution, and a relational justification of explainability. Science and Engineering Ethics26: 2051–2068.
15.
ConnorST (2012) 9/11 – A new Pearl Harbor? Analogies, narratives, and meanings of 9/11 in civil society. Cultural Sociology6(1): 3–25.
16.
DevadasonR (2011) Metaphor, social capital and sociological imaginaries. The Sociological Review59(3): 633–654.
17.
DiakopoulosN (2015) Algorithmic accountability: Journalistic investigation of computational power structures. Digital Journalism3(3): 398–415.
18.
DiMaggioP (1997) Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology23: 263–287.
19.
DiMaggioPNagMBleiD (2013) Exploiting affinities between topic modeling and the sociological perspective on culture: Application to newspaper coverage of U.S. government arts funding. Poetics41(6): 570–606.
20.
DoddN (2018) The social life of Bitcoin. Theory, Culture & Society35(3): 35–56.
21.
EsserFUmbrichtA (2014) The evolution of objective and interpretative journalism in the Western press: Comparing six news systems since the 1960s. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly91(2): 229–249.
EyalG (2013) For a sociology of expertise: The social origins of the autism epidemic. American Journal of Sociology118(4): 863–907.
24.
EyermanR (2008) The Assassination of Theo van Gogh. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
25.
FaircloughN (1995) Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
26.
FineGAChristoforidesL (1991) Dirty birds, filthy immigrants, and the English sparrow war: Metaphorical linkage in constructing social problems. Symbolic Interaction14: 375–393.
27.
FlahertyMGFineGA (2001) Present, past, and future. Time & Society10(2–3): 147–161.
28.
FosterJG (2023) From thin to thick: Toward a politics of human-compatible AI. Public Culture35(3(101)): 417–430.
29.
GentnerD (1998) Analogy. In: BechtelWGrahamG (eds) A Companion to Cognitive Science. London: Blackwell Publishing, pp.107–113.
30.
GyollaiD (2022) The sociocognitive approach in critical discourse studies and the phenomenological sociology of knowledge: Intersections. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences21(3): 539–558.
31.
HaleemAJavaidMSinghRP (2022) An era of ChatGPT as a significant futuristic support tool: A study on features, abilities, and challenges. BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations2(4): 100089.
32.
HaqueMUDharmadasaISwornaZT, et al (2022) “I think this is the most disruptive technology”: Exploring sentiments of ChatGPT early adopters using Twitter data. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.05856.
33.
HeatonDNicheleEClosJ, et al (2024) “ChatGPT says no”: Agency, trust, and blame in Twitter discourses after the launch of ChatGPT. AI and Ethics. Epub ahead of print 23 January 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s43681-023-00414-1.
34.
HilgartnerSBoskCL (1988) The rise and fall of social problems: A public arenas model. American Journal of Sociology94(1): 53–78.
35.
HollanderJAGordonHR (2006) The processes of social construction in talk. Symbolic Interaction29(2): 183–212.
36.
JoyceKSmith-DoerrLAlegriaS, et al (2021) Toward a sociology of artificial intelligence: A Call for research on inequalities and structural change. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World7: 1–28.
37.
JungherrAPoseggaOAnJ (2019) Discursive power in contemporary media systems: A comparative framework. The International Journal of Press/Politics24(4): 404–425.
38.
KepleyDR (1984) Sampling in archives: A review. The American Archivist47(3): 237–242.
39.
KnightCR (2023) Classifying the corporation: The role of naturalizing analogies in American corporate development, 1870–1930. Socio-Economic Review21(3): 1629–1655.
40.
LakoffGJohnsonM (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
41.
Lee WoodMStoltzDSVan NessJ, et al (2018) Schemas and frames. Sociological Theory36(3): 244–261.
42.
LiuZ (2021) Sociological perspectives on artificial intelligence: A typological reading. Sociology Compass15(3): e12851.
43.
MolotchHLesterM (1974) News as purposive behavior: On the strategic use of routine events, accidents, and scandals. American Sociological Review39(1): 101–112.
44.
OlesenT (2020) The Hiroshima memory complex. The British Journal of Sociology71(1): 81–95.
45.
PengLZhaoB (2024) Navigating the ethical landscape behind ChatGPT. Big Data & Society11(1): 1–5.
46.
Pool I deS (1983) Technologies of Freedom. Cambridge, MA; London: Belknap press.
47.
RayPP (2023) ChatGPT: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope. Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical Systems3: 121–154.
48.
RazAHeinrichsBAvnoonN, et al (2024) Prediction and explainability in AI: Striking a new balance?Big Data & Society11(1): 1–5.
49.
SartoriLTheodorouA (2022) A sociotechnical perspective for the future of AI: Narratives, inequalities, and human control. Ethics and Information Technology24(4): 1–11.
50.
SchönDA (1979) Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy. In: OrtonyA (ed) Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.254–283.
51.
ShoreB (1996) Culture in Mind: Cognition, Culture, and the Problem of Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
52.
SmithP (1998) The New American Cultural Sociology. Cambridge cultural social studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
SwedbergR (2020) Using metaphors in sociology: Pitfalls and potentials. The American Sociologist51(2): 240–257.
54.
TaecharungrojV (2023) What can ChatGPT do? Analyzing early reactions to the innovative AI chatbot on Twitter. Big Data and Cognitive Computing7(1): 35.
55.
ThompsonLFineGA (1999) Socially shared cognition, affect, and behavior: A review and integration. Personality and Social Psychology Review3(4): 278–302.
56.
TimmermansSTavoryI (2012) Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory30(3): 167–186.
57.
TimmermansSTavoryI (2022) Data Analysis in Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
58.
TsoukasH (1991) The missing link: A transformational view of metaphors in organizational science. The Academy of Management Review16(3): 566–585.
59.
VaaraEMoninP (2010) A recursive perspective on discursive legitimation and organizational action in mergers and acquisitions. Organization Science21(1): 3–22.
60.
VaaraETienariJLaurilaJ (2006) Pulp and paper fiction: On the discursive legitimation of global industrial restructuring. Organization Studies27(6): 789–813.
61.
Van DijkTA (1993) Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society4(2): 249–283.
62.
Van DijkTA (2014a) Discourse and Knowledge: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
63.
Van DijkTA (2014b) Discourse-cognition-society: Current state and prospects of the socio-cognitive approach to discourse. In: HartCCapP (eds) Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies. London: Bloomsbury, pp.121–146.
64.
Van DijkTA (2015) Critical discourse analysis. In: TannenDHamiltonHESchiffrinD (eds) The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 2nd edn. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, pp.466–485.
65.
Van LeeuwenT (2007) Legitimation in discourse and communication. Discourse & Communication1(1): 91–112.
66.
Van LeeuwenTWodakR (1999) Legitimizing immigration control: A discourse-historical analysis. Discourse Studies1(1): 83–118.
67.
WeickKE (1993) The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly38(4): 628–652.
68.
XuZFangQHuangY, et al (2024) The public attitude towards ChatGPT on reddit: A study based on unsupervised learning from sentiment analysis and topic modeling. PLoS ONE19(5): e0302502.
69.
ZhouJKePQiuX, et al (2024) ChatGPT: Potential, prospects, and limitations. Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering25(1): 6–11.
