This study explores the range of discursive patterns used to present artificial intelligence as a revolutionary but controversial technology in online science journalism. It uses a triangulated dataset of over a hundred recent mini-narratives sourced from New Scientist, Nature daily briefings, and Scientific American to reconstruct typical storylines in the thematic domains of research, business, and society, and to map their narrative trajectories (utopian, dystopian). The qualitative analysis uses the categories of agency, sentiment, point of view, and news value to capture these outlets’ contributions to the evolving sociotechnical imaginary of AI technologies. While acknowledging some risks of AI technologies, elite commercial science journalism highlights the benefits and celebrates the scientific advancements produced with or by AI. Also, AI technologies are communicated strategically to increase newsworthiness, through diverse complications in storylines with oscillating sentiments and a focus on impacts and novelty. This tends to prime news recipients to accept the inevitable technological progress and normalizes algorithms as increasingly independent research-performing agents.
BareisJKatzenbachC (2021) Talking AI into being: The narratives and imaginaries of national AI strategies and their performative politics. Science, Technology, & Human Values47(5): 855–881.
BednarekMCapleH (2017) The Discourse of News Values. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4.
BellA (1991) The Language of News Media. Oxford: Blackwell.
5.
CaveSDihalKDillonS (2020) Introduction: Imagining AI. In: CaveSDihalKDillonS (eds) AI Narratives: A History of Imaginative Thinking about Intelligent Machines. Oxford: Oxford Academic, pp.1–24.
6.
DahlstromMF (2014) Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences111(4): 13614–13620.
7.
FahnestockJ (1993) Accommodating science: The rhetorical life of scientific facts. In: McRaeMW (ed.) The Literature of Science. Athens: University of Georgia Press. pp.17–36.
8.
FaircloughN (2012) Critical discourse analysis. In: GeeJPHandfordM (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Abingdon: Routledge, pp.9–21.
GentaGRiberiP (2019) Technology and the Growth of Civilization. Cham: Springer.
11.
GrafASonnbergerM (2020) Responsibility, rationality, and acceptance: How future users of autonomous driving are constructed in stakeholders’ sociotechnical imaginaries. Public Understanding of Science29(1): 61–75.
12.
HeineltHMünchS (eds) (2018) Handbook of European Policies. Interpretive Approaches to the EU. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
13.
JasanoffS (2013) Science as a Public Reason. London: Routledge.
14.
JasanoffSKimSH (2009) Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva47(2): 119–146.
15.
JensenE (2012) Scientific sensationalism in American and British press coverage of therapeutic cloning. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly89(1): 40–54.
16.
JewittCLeder MackleyKPriceS (2021) Digital touch for remote personal communication: An emergent sociotechnical imaginary. New Media & Society23(1): 99–120.
17.
LabovW (1997) Some further steps in narrative analysis. Journal of Narrative and Life History7(1–4): 395–415.
18.
LazzerettiL (2023) The Rise of Algorithmic Society and the Strategic Role of Arts and Culture. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
19.
LiebigLGüttelLJobinA, et al. (2024) Subnational AI policy: Shaping AI in a multi-level governance system. AI & Society39: 1477–1490.
20.
MagerAKatzenbachC (2021) Future imaginaries in the making and governing of digital technology: Multiple, contested, commodified. New Media & Society23(2): 223–236.
21.
MellorF (2015) Non-news values in science journalism. In: RappertBBalmerB (eds) Absence in Science, Security and Policy: From Research Agendas to Global Strategy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.93–113.
22.
Molek-KozakowskaK (2017) Communicating environmental science beyond academia: Stylistic patterns of newsworthiness in popular science journalism. Discourse & Communication11(1): 69–88.
23.
Molek-KozakowskaK (2024) Making science trend. In: MellorF (ed.) Insights on Science Journalism. London: Routledge, pp.159–176.
24.
Molek-KozakowskaKStruchkovaS (2022) Communicating risks of an anti-COVID-19 vaccine in Poland: A comparative case study of content, style and advocacy of three media outlets. In: HohausP (ed.) Science Communication in Times of Crisis. Amsterdam: John Banjamins, pp.143–168.
25.
NelkinD (1995) Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology. New York: W.H. Freeman.
26.
NilssonNJ (2010). The Quest for Artificial Intelligence: A History of Ideas and Achievements 1933–2009. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
ProppV (1968) Morphology of the Folktale. Austin: University of Texas Press.
28.
RichterVKatzenbachCSchaferM (2023) Imaginaries of artificial intelligence. In: LindgrenS (ed.) Handbook of Critical Studies of Artificial Intelligence. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp.209–223.
29.
RoderickI (2016) Critical Discourse Studies and Technology: A Multimodal Approach to Analysing Technoculture. London: Bloomsbury.
30.
RosenbloomDBertonHMeadowcroftJ (2016) Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada. Research Policy45: 1275–1290.
31.
RudekTJ (2022) Capturing the invisible. Sociotechnical imaginaries of energy. The critical overview. Science and Public Policy49(2): 219–245.
32.
Rudiak-GouldP (2014) Progress, decline, and the public uptake of climate science. Public Understanding of Science23(2): 142–156.
33.
SadowskiJBendorR (2019) Selling smartness: Corporate narratives and the smart city as a sociotechnical imaginary. Science, Technology & Human Values44(3): 540–563.
34.
SimpsonP (1993) Ideology and Point of View. London: Routledge.
35.
SteinhauerJ (2022) History, Disrupted: How Social Media and the World Wide Web Have Changed the Past. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
36.
van LeeuwenT (1996) The representation of social actors. In: Caldas CoulthardCRCoulthardM (eds) Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge, pp.32–70.
37.
VergeerM (2020) Artificial intelligence in the Dutch press: An analysis of topics and trends. Communication Studies71(3): 373–392.
38.
VicentePNDias-TrindadeS (2021) Reframing sociotechnical imaginaries: The case of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Public Understanding of Science30(6): 708–723.
39.
WongJClaypoolE (2021) Narratives, masks and COVID-19: A qualitative reflection. Qualitative Social Work20(1–2): 206–213.
