Tech
Media professor says AI’s superior ability to formulate thoughts for us weakens our ability to think critically
AI’s superior ability to formulate thoughts and statements for us weakens our judgment and ability to think critically, says media professor Petter Bae Brandtzæg.
No one knew about Chat GPT just three years ago. Today, 800 million people use the technology. The speed at which AI is rolling out breaks all records and has become the new normal.
Many AI researchers, like Brandtzæg, are skeptical. AI is a technology that interferes with our ability to think, read, and write. “We can largely avoid social media, but not AI. It is integrated into social media, Word, online newspapers, email programs, and the like. We all become partners with AI—whether we want to or not,” says Brandtzæg.
The professor of media innovations at the University of Oslo has examined how AI affects us in the recently completed project “An AI-Powered Society.”
The freedom of expression commission overlooked AI
The project has been conducted in collaboration with the research institute SINTEF. It is the first of its kind in Norway to research generative AI, that is, AI that creates content, and how it affects both users and the public.
The background was that Brandtzæg reacted to the fact that the report from the Norwegian Commission for Freedom of Expression, which was presented in 2022, did not sufficiently address the impact of AI on society—at least not generative AI.
“There are studies that show that AI can weaken critical thinking. It affects our language, how we think, understand the world, and our moral judgment,” says Brandtzæg.
A few months after the Commission for Freedom of Expression report, ChatGPT was launched, making his research even more relevant.
“We wanted to understand how such generative AI affects society, and especially how AI changes social structures and relationships.”
AI-Individualism
The social implications of generative AI is a relatively new field that still lacks theory and concepts, and the researchers have therefore launched the concept of “AI-individualism.” It builds on “network individualism,” a framework which was launched in the early 2000s.
Back then, the need was to express how smartphones, the Internet, and social media enabled people to create and tailor their social networks beyond family, friends, and neighbors.
Networked individualism showed how technology weakened the old limits of time and place, enabling flexible, personalized networks. With AI, something new happens: the line between people and systems also starts to blur, as AI begins to take on roles that used to belong to humans.
“AI can also meet personal, social, and emotional needs,” says Brandtzæg.
With a background in psychology, he has for a long time studied human-AI relationships with chatbots like Replika. ChatGPT and similar social AIs can provide immediate, personal support for any number of things.
“It strengthens individualism by enabling more autonomous behavior and reducing our dependence on people around us. While it can enhance personal autonomy, it may also weaken community ties. A shift toward AI-individualism could therefore reshape core social structures.”
He argues that the concept of “AI-individualism” offers a new perspective for understanding and explaining how relationships change in society with AI. “We use it as a relational partner, a collaborative partner at work, to make decisions,” says Brandtzæg.
Students choose chatbot
The project is based on several investigations, including a questionnaire with open-ended answers to 166 high school students on how they use AI.
“They (ChatGPT and MyAI) go straight to the point regarding what we ask, so we don’t have to search endlessly in the books or online,” said one high school student about the benefits of AI.
“ChatGPT helps me with problems, I can open up and talk about difficult things, get comfort and good advice,” responded a student.
In another study, using an online experiment with a blind test, it turned out that many preferred answers from a chatbot over a professional when they had questions about mental health. More than half preferred answers from a chatbot, less than 20% said a professional, while 30% responded both.
“This shows how powerful this technology is, and that we sometimes prefer AI-generated content over human-generated,” says Brandtzæg.
‘Model power’
The theory of “model power” is another concept they’ve launched. It builds on a power relationship theory developed by sociologist Stein Bråten 50 years ago.
Model power is the influence one has by being in possession of a model of reality that has impact, and which others must accept in the absence of equivalent models of power of their own, according to the article “Modellmakt og styring” (online newspaper Panorama—in Norwegian).
In the 1970s, it was about how media, science, and various groups with authority could influence people, and had model power. Now it’s AI.
Brandtzæg’s point is that AI-generated content no longer operates in a vacuum. It spreads everywhere, in public reports, new media, in research, and in encyclopedias. When we perform Google searches, we first get an AI-generated summary.
“A kind of AI layer is covering everything. We suggest that the model power of social AI can lead to model monopolies, significantly affecting human beliefs and behavior.”
Because AI models, like ChatGPT, are based on dialog, they call them social AI. But how genuine is a dialog with a machine fed with enormous amounts of text?
“Social AI can promote an illusion of real conversation and independence—a pseudo-autonomy through pseudo-dialog,” says Brandtzæg.
Critical but still following AI advice
According to a survey from The Norwegian Communications Authority (Nkom) from August 2025, 91% of Norwegians are concerned about the spread of false information from AI services like Copilot, ChatGPT, and Gemini.
AI can hallucinate. A known example is a report the municipality of Tromsø used as a basis for a proposal to close eight schools, was based on sources that AI had fabricated. Thus, AI may contribute to misinformation, and may undermine user trust in both AI, service providers and public institutions.
Brandtzæg asks how many other smaller municipalities and public institutions have done the same and he is worried about the spread of this unintentional spread of misinformation.
He and his researcher colleagues have reviewed various studies indicating that although we like to say we are critical, we nevertheless follow AI’s advice, which highlights the model power in such AI systems.
“It’s perhaps not surprising that we follow the advice that we get. It’s the first time in history that we’re talking to a kind of almighty entity that has read so much. But it gives a model power that is scary. We believe we are in a dialog, that it’s cooperation, but it’s one-way communication.”
American monoculture
Another aspect of this model power is that the AI companies are based in the U.S. and built on vast amounts of American data.
“We estimate that as little as 0.1% is Norwegian in AI models like ChatGPT. This means that it is American information we relate to, which can affect our values, norms and decisions.”
What does this mean for diversity? The principle is that “the winner takes it all.” AI does not consider minority interests. Brandtzæg points out that the world has never before faced such an intrusive technology, which necessitates regulation and balancing against real human needs and values.
“We must not forget that AI is not a public, democratic project. It’s commercial, and behind it are a few American companies and billionaires,” says Brandtzæg.
More information:
Marita Skjuve et al, Unge og helseinformasjon, Tidsskrift for velferdsforskning (2025). DOI: 10.18261/tfv.27.4.2
Petter Bae Brandtzaeg et al, AI Individualism, Oxford Intersections: AI in Society (2025). DOI: 10.1093/9780198945215.003.0099
Citation:
Media professor says AI’s superior ability to formulate thoughts for us weakens our ability to think critically (2025, November 16)
retrieved 16 November 2025
from https://techxplore.com/news/2025-11-media-professor-ai-superior-ability.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
Tech
Can OpenAI’s ‘Master of Disaster’ Fix AI’s Reputation Crisis?
Three months ago, OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman told me his concerns about a mounting public relations crisis facing artificial intelligence companies: Despite the popularity of tools like ChatGPT, an increasingly large share of the population said they viewed AI negatively. Since then, the backlash has only intensified.
College commencement speakers are now getting booed for talking about AI in optimistic terms. Last month, someone threw a Molotov cocktail at OpenAI CEO Sam Altman’s San Francisco home and wrote a manifesto advocating for crimes against AI executives. No one has more to lose from this reputation crisis than OpenAI.
The person tasked with trying to fix it is Chris Lehane, OpenAI’s chief of global affairs and a veteran political operative. I sat down with him this week to discuss what I’d argue are his two biggest challenges yet: convincing the world to embrace OpenAI’s technology, while at the same time persuading lawmakers to adopt regulations that won’t hamper the company’s growth. Lehane views these goals as one in the same.
“When I was in the White House, we always used to talk about how good policy equals good politics,” says Lehane. “You have to think about both of these things moving in concert.”
After working on crisis communications in Bill Clinton’s White House, Lehane gave himself the nickname “master of disaster.” He later helped Airbnb fend off regulators in cities that viewed short-term home rentals as existing in a legal gray area, or as he puts it, “ahead of the law.” Lehane also played an instrumental role in the formation of Fairshake, a powerful crypto industry super PAC that worked to legitimize digital currencies in Washington. Since joining OpenAI in 2024, he’s quickly become one of the company’s most influential executives and now oversees its communications and policy teams.
Lehane tells me public narratives about how AI will change society are often “artificially binary.” On one side is the “Bob Ross view of the world” that predicts a future where nobody has to work anymore and everyone lives in “beachside homes painting in watercolors all day.” On the other is a dystopian future in which AI has become so powerful that only a small group of elites have the ability to control it. Neither scenario, in Lehane’s opinion, is very realistic.
OpenAI is guilty of promoting this kind of polarizing speech in the past. CEO Sam Altman warned last year that “whole classes of jobs” will go away when the singularity arrives. More recently he has softened his tone, declaring that “jobs doomerism is likely long-term wrong.”
Lehane wants OpenAI to start conveying a more “calibrated” message about the promises of AI that avoids either of these extremes. He says the company needs to put forward real solutions to the problems people are worried about, such as potential widespread job loss and the negative impacts of chatbots on children. As an example of this work, Lehane pointed to a list of policy proposals that OpenAI recently published, which include creating a four-day work week, expanding access to health care, and passing a tax on AI-powered labor.
“If you’re going to go out and say that there are challenges here, you also then have an obligation—particularly if you’re building this stuff—to actually come up with the ideas to solve those things,” Lehane says.
Some former OpenAI employees, however, have accused the company of downplaying the potential downsides of AI adoption. WIRED previously reported that members of OpenAI’s economic research unit quit after they became concerned that it was morphing into an advocacy arm for the company. The former employees argued that their warnings about AI’s economic impacts may have been inconvenient for OpenAI, but they honestly reflected what the company’s research found.
Packing Punches
With public skepticism toward AI growing, politicians are under pressure to prove to voters they can rein in tech companies. To combat this, the AI industry has stood up a new group of super PACs that are boosting pro-AI political candidates and trying to influence public opinion about the technology. Critics say the move backfired, and some candidates have started campaigning on the fact that AI super PACS are opposing them.
Lehane helped set up one of the biggest pro-AI super PACs, Leading the Future, which launched last summer with more than $100 million in funding commitments from tech industry figures, including Brockman. The group has opposed Alex Bores, the author of New York’s strongest AI safety law who is running for Congress in the state’s 12th district.
Tech
Meta Is in Crisis, Google Search’s Makeover, and AI Gets Booed by Graduates
Leah Feiger: Let’s invest.
Zoë Schiffer: They have that going for a while.
Leah Feiger: It wasn’t full Google, but it—
Zoë Schiffer: Somewhat there.
Leah Feiger: —had that vibe. To me, someone so on the outside of this in every single way, I know about these layoffs because they’ve been, A) so chaotic, but B) in some ways, needlessly so. Not to say that other tech companies aren’t firing scores of workers all the time. That feels like something we discuss on this podcast frequently, but this is happening with such a large runway and in a way that’s making employees feel so terrible about themselves.
Brian Barrett: Well, because it’s not just the layoffs, right? It’s also, even if you stay there, if you’re not culled from the herd, you are going to have to deal with this world in which you’ve got spyware on your laptops training AI to probably take your job at some point, right?
Zoë Schiffer: Explain that a little bit.
Brian Barrett: Meta announced, and this was more public, that they were going to put software on employee laptops that would monitor their keystrokes and how they move their cursors and basically how they do their job as Meta engineers and use that as training data for their own internal models to try to make their AI models better because they’re running out of other sources.
Zoë Schiffer: And could you opt out of that, Brian?
Brian Barrett: That’s a great question. I’m so glad you asked. You could not opt out.
Zoë Schiffer: I felt you didn’t know the answer to that one.
Brian Barrett: In fact, when an employee asked in a very public forum within Meta, “Hey, could we not do this?” Zoë, the response was?
Zoë Schiffer: Oh, absolutely you’re going to do this and shame on you for asking. And some of the employees who are staying, actually thousands of the employees who are staying, are getting drafted into the AI ranks. We published a piece today that was kind of about the morale inside the company, but also how there’s been this mad dash to use up perks and stipends that employees have. But one of the things that’s said at the end was that remaining employees are being asked to join AI teams. So whatever your job was previously, they’re internally getting drafted. You’re getting drafted into the AI ranks, now your job is going to look quite different.
Brian Barrett: That’s like 7,000 people.
Zoë Schiffer: Yes.
Leah Feiger: I’ve actually heard people use the word raptured.
Zoë Schiffer: Oh, my gosh.
Leah Feiger: Isn’t that—
Zoë Schiffer: And I wish we had that in the story.
Leah Feiger: I’m so sorry, but raptured into other teams. All of a sudden one day they’ve just disappeared. After this layoff, has Zuckerberg and co proposed a sort of coherent leadership plan or proposal? What happens after this?
Tech
Why the 2026 Hurricane Season Might Not Be That Bad
Atlantic hurricane season is almost upon us, and the early signs indicate it might be less active than usual. But that’s no reason to delete your weather app and ignore the forecast.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is predicting eight to 14 named tropical systems, of which three to six will become hurricanes and one to three will be Category 3 or higher.
“What’s driving this forecast is largely an El Niño event,” said NOAA administrator Neil Jacobs.
Characterized by a tongue of hot water stretching across the Pacific, El Niño is likely to emerge this summer. That stretch of warm ocean rearranges weather patterns around the world. In the case of the tropical Atlantic, El Niño stirs up winds that make it hard for hurricanes to spin up. Those that do can sometimes be torn apart by what’s going on in the upper atmosphere. (The opposite is true in the Pacific, and NOAA is predicting a very active season in that ocean basin.)
During the three past super El Niños, accumulated cyclone energy—a metric that factors in storms’ strength and longevity—was well below normal.
That said, El Niño, even an extremely strong one, is only one of many factors that impact hurricane season. Hot local ocean temperatures can help storms form and gain strength, and the Atlantic is currently warmer than normal.
At the same time, Sahara dust can gum up the atmosphere and inhibit storms from forming. It’s also notoriously hard to predict when plumes of it will kick up. That’s what happened last year, when a below-average number of named storms formed despite an active forecast. Despite the lower-than-expected activity, last year still spawned Hurricane Melissa, one of the strongest storms to ever make landfall in the Atlantic basin.
All of which is to say that the seasonal forecast is a handy guide for what to expect, and it’s great for federal and state agencies to preposition supplies and resources. But it’s what happens with individual storms that ultimately matters.
“Even though we’re expecting a below average season in the Atlantic, it’s important to understand it only takes one,” Jacobs said, noting that even in quiet years, Category 5 storms have still made landfall.
The Trump administration has slashed staffing at NOAA and reduced the collection of some data, such as weather balloons, that can impact forecasts. Jacobs touted the value of new observations, including aerial drones that will be deployed operationally for the first time.
NOAA has also ramped up the use of artificial intelligence weather models trained on historical data. During the 2025 hurricane season, the agency tested an experimental hurricane model developed with Google DeepMind. Late last year, it also rolled out a suite of AI weather models to use in operational forecasting, in addition to traditional weather models that use equations to forecast the weather.
The agency says that the AI version of its flagship model provides better prediction of the tracks of tropical cyclones—the generic name for hurricanes—though it lags traditional weather models in predicting their intensity.
-
Entertainment1 week agoConan O’Brien hat tricks as Oscar host
-
Fashion1 week agoItaly’s Zegna Group’s Q1 growth boosted by strong organic performance
-
Entertainment6 days agoWhere Pete Davidson, Elsie Hewitt stand after breakup: Details revealed
-
Business1 week agoTui issues update on summer jet fuel shortage fears
-
Business1 week agoJersey Election 2026: Cost of living concern in St Helier Central
-
Entertainment7 days agoEmilia Clarke recalls near-death incident while filming ‘Game of Thrones’
-
Fashion1 week agoGlobal cotton production, stocks to fall; consumption to rise: WASDE
-
Politics6 days agoRising diesel costs from Iran war strain US school budgets
