Artificial intelligence poses profound challenges to democratic institutions that have evolved over centuries to mediate human political competition—challenges that make previous concerns about television’s impact on democracy seem quaintly provincial. AI-powered influence operations can microtarget voters with personalised disinformation, algorithmic curation shapes political discourse on social media platforms, and automated systems increasingly make consequential decisions about citizens’ lives with minimal democratic accountability. Meanwhile, the concentration of AI capabilities in a handful of technology companies creates power asymmetries that challenge democratic governance itself. These developments raise urgent questions about whether democratic systems designed for an earlier era can maintain legitimacy and effectiveness in an age of artificial intelligence (Deibert, 2019; Nemitz, 2018).
AI-enabled election interference represents perhaps the most immediate threat to democratic processes, though calling it ‘interference’ rather underplays the sophistication involved. Micro-targeted political advertising exploits detailed psychological profiles to influence voter behaviour with messages crafted for maximum impact on specific individuals (Gorton, 2016). Automated bots amplify partisan content and suppress opposition voices on social media, creating false impressions of public opinion that influence genuine voters—a manipulation technique that makes traditional propaganda look refreshingly honest by comparison. Deepfake videos can place false words in candidates’ mouths days before elections, leaving insufficient time for debunking before polls close. Foreign actors deploy these tools to sow discord and undermine confidence in democratic institutions, whilst domestic political operatives use similar techniques in the grey areas between persuasion and manipulation (Bradshaw and Howard, 2019; Woolley and Howard, 2018).
The algorithmic curation of information corrodes the shared reality essential for democratic deliberation—a problem that transcends partisan divides even as it exacerbates them. Social media platforms employ AI to maximise engagement, which in practice means promoting content that triggers emotional responses, particularly outrage and fear (Vaidhyanathan, 2018). This creates filter bubbles wherein citizens encounter primarily information confirming existing beliefs, whilst contrary evidence remains invisible. The result fragments the public sphere into incompatible reality tunnels, making constructive political dialogue increasingly difficult. When citizens cannot agree on basic facts, democratic deliberation becomes impossible—a situation that authoritarians exploit with enthusiasm whilst democrats wring their hands with considerably less effect (Sunstein, 2017; Persily and Tucker, 2020).
Democratic accountability struggles to keep pace with AI systems making consequential decisions about citizens—decisions that increasingly escape meaningful oversight. Algorithms determine who receives welfare benefits, which neighbourhoods receive police attention, and who gets approved for loans, operating with speed and scale that overwhelm traditional administrative oversight mechanisms (Eubanks, 2018). The opacity of these systems prevents citizens from understanding how decisions affecting them are made, let alone challenging them effectively. Moreover, the private sector develops and deploys much AI technology, creating accountability gaps where neither market discipline nor democratic oversight operates adequately. The fundamental democratic principle that power must be accountable to those it affects faces perhaps its greatest challenge since universal suffrage (Ananny and Crawford, 2018).
Strengthening democracy against AI-enabled threats requires institutional innovations that governments have thus far proved reluctant to implement. Transparency requirements could mandate disclosure of AI systems’ operation in consequential domains, though balancing transparency against intellectual property protection and security concerns proves contentious. Digital literacy education might help citizens recognise manipulation, though keeping pace with evolving AI tactics presents obvious difficulties. Regulatory frameworks could establish guardrails for AI deployment in democratic contexts, assuming political will sufficient to constrain powerful technology companies—an assumption that current lobbying expenditures suggest may be optimistic. International cooperation could establish norms against AI-enabled election interference, though enforcing such norms faces all the usual challenges of cyberspace governance plus several novel ones. Perhaps most fundamentally, democracies must grapple with whether AI capabilities create power concentrations incompatible with democratic equality, and if so, what structural changes might address this—questions that make previous constitutional crises look straightforward by comparison (Danaher et al., 2017; Balkin, 2018).
References
Ananny, M. and Crawford, K. (2018) ‘Seeing without knowing: Limitations of the transparency ideal and its application to algorithmic accountability’, New Media & Society, 20(3), pp. 973-989.
Balkin, J.M. (2018) ‘Free speech in the algorithmic society: Big data, private governance, and new school speech regulation’, UC Davis Law Review, 51, pp. 1149-1210.
Bradshaw, S. and Howard, P.N. (2019) ‘The global disinformation order: 2019 global inventory of organised social media manipulation’, Oxford Internet Institute Working Paper.
Danaher, J. et al. (2017) ‘Algorithmic governance: Developing a research agenda through the power of collective intelligence’, Big Data & Society, 4(2), pp. 1-21.
Deibert, R.J. (2019) ‘The road to digital unfreedom: Three painful truths about social media’, Journal of Democracy, 30(1), pp. 25-39.
Eubanks, V. (2018) Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Gorton, W.A. (2016) ‘Manipulating citizens: How political campaigns’ use of behavioral social science harms democracy’, New Political Science, 38(1), pp. 61-80.
Nemitz, P. (2018) ‘Constitutional democracy and technology in the age of artificial intelligence’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 376(2133), p. 20180089.
Persily, N. and Tucker, J.A. (eds.) (2020) Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, Prospects for Reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sunstein, C.R. (2017) #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Vaidhyanathan, S. (2018) Antisocial Media: How Facebook Disconnects Us and Undermines Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Woolley, S.C. and Howard, P.N. (2018) Computational Propaganda: Political Parties, Politicians, and Political Manipulation on Social Media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.