# data[].attributes.body
“Artificial Intelligence, Digital Self, and the ‘Best Interests’ Problem.” American Journal of Bioethics, vol. 24, no. 7, July 2024, pp. 27–28.

Jeffrey Todd Berger.

EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2024.2353028.

This specific source describes digital autonomy, serving as a good example to how AI algorithms can influence a user to misrepresent themselves, or skew their digital persona to confirm to their algorithm.

-“Therefore, weighting of social media

activity (e.g. posts, “likes”) for AI input may lead to a

particular outputs of uncertain value,” (Berger, 27).

“Data correlative to the patient’s discernable demographic characteristics such as

estimated age, sex, apparent gender identity, and ethnicity, may provide some bearing to an otherwise assumptive decision making process,” (Berger, 28).

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 1: Social Media and the Workplace; Author: Kenneth Olmstead

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 1: Social Media and the Workplace; Author: Kenneth Olmstead

# data[].attributes.body
Discusses data and statistics regarding how social media affects workers in the workplace regarding productivity, building relationships with co-workers, etc. Shows how social media makes impact in a professional setting

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Social media influences and permeates many aspects of daily life for Americans today, and the workforce is no exception. These digital platforms offer the potential to enhance worker productivity by fostering connections with colleagues and resources around the globe. At the same time, employers might worry that employees are using these tools for non-work purposes while on the job or engaging in speech in public venues that might reflect poorly on their organization.

A Pew Research Center survey of 2,003 American adults (including 795 who are currently employed on a full- or part-time basis) conducted Sept. 11-14 and 18-21, 2014, finds that social media plays some role in the lives of many American workers - but that role is not always clear-cut or entirely positive.

Today's workers incorporate social media into a wide range of activities while on the job. Some of these activities are explicitly professional or job-related, while others are more personal in nature. The survey asked Americans who are employed full- or part-time about eight different ways they might use social media while on the job and found that:

34% ever use social media while at work to take a mental break from their job

27% to connect with friends and family while at work

24% to make or support professional connections

20% to get information that helps them solve problems at work

17% to build or strengthen personal relationships with coworkers

17% to learn about someone they work with

12% to ask work-related questions of people outside their organization

12% to ask such questions of people inside their organization

As noted above, 17% of workers say they use social media to build or strengthen personal relationships at work - but the transparency that social media facilitates comes with costs as well as benefits. Some 14% of workers have found information on social media that has improved their professional opinion of a colleague; at the same time, a similar share (16%) have found information on social media that has lowered their professional opinion of a colleague.

Younger workers are more likely than their older counterparts to say they have discovered information about a colleague on social media that lowered their professional opinion of them - but also are more likely than older workers to have found information that improved their professional opinion of a colleague.

Some 23% of workers ages 18 to 29 report that they have discovered information on social media that improved their professional opinion of a colleague. By comparison, just 12% of workers ages 30 to 49 and 9% of workers ages 50 to 64 have experienced this. Similarly, 29% of these younger workers have discovered information that lowered their professional opinion of a colleague: 16% of those ages 30 to 49 and 6% of those ages 50 to 64 indicate that this has happened to them.

Many workers report that their employers have policies about social media use on the job, or about how employees may present themselves in various online spaces. Half of all full-time and part-time workers (51%) say their workplace has rules about using social media while at work (45% say their employer does not have these policies), while 32% report that their employer has policies about how employees may present themselves on the internet in general (63% say their employer does not have these policies).

Policies that regulate how employers present themselves online outside of work may be expected to influence whether these workers use social media at all. However, this does not seem to be the case: Fully 77% of workers report using social media regardless of whether their employer has such a policy in place.

At the same time, there is some evidence that workplace policies concerning social media use while on the job may have an effect. Workers whose companies have policies regulating social media use at work are less likely to use social media in certain ways:

30% of workers whose companies have an at-work social media policy say they use social media while on the job to take a break from work, compared with 40% of workers whose employers do not have such policies.

20% of workers whose employers have at-work social media policies say they use social media to stay connected to family and friends while on the job, compared with 35% of workers whose social media use is not regulated at work.

Only 16% of workers whose companies regulate social media at work say they use social media while working to get information that's helpful to their job, compared with 25% of those whose workplaces have no such regulations.

On the other hand, workers are equally likely to say they use social media for a range of purposes regardless of their workplace policy, including:

Making or supporting professional contacts that help them do their job

Learning more about someone they work with

Building or strengthening personal relationships with coworkers

Asking work-related questions of people outside their organization

Asking work-related questions of people inside their organization

A relatively modest share of workers say they have incorporated specific social media platforms into their day-to-day work lives:

19% of workers say they ever use Facebook for work-related purposes.

14% ever use LinkedIn for work-related purposes.

3% ever use Twitter for work-related purposes.

9% use a social media tool provided by their employer for work-related purposes.

5% use social media platforms other than the ones listed above for work-related purposes.

But among the group that answered yes to at least one of the items above - that is, the subset of workers who use at least one social media tool for job-related purposes - large shares see certain positive or beneficial impacts on their job performance:

78% of workers who use social media platforms for work-related purposes say social media is useful for networking or finding new job opportunities.

71% of these workers say social media is useful for staying in touch with others in their field.

56% say it is useful for connecting with experts.

51% say it is useful for getting to know their co-workers on a personal basis.

46% say it is useful for finding information they need to do their job.

On the other hand, these workers are divided on the utility of social media in other respects, especially when it comes to the impact of social media use on their own job performance:

56% of workers who use social media platforms for work-related purposes agree that social media distracts from the work they need to do, with 30% agreeing strongly. Some 42% of these workers disagree that social media is a distraction.

54% of these workers agree that social media breaks help them recharge at work. A statistically similar proportion (46%) disagree that social media breaks help them recharge while on the job.

51% of these workers agree that social media use at work lets them see too much information about their coworkers; 47% disagree with this statement.

In the end, a majority (56%) of these workers believe that using social media ultimately helps their job performance. One-in-five (22%) believe that it mostly hurts, 16% feel that it doesn't have much impact either way and 4% see both the benefits and the drawbacks.

Even as the internet has embedded itself in numerous aspects of American life, many of today's workers make only marginal use of the internet for accomplishing work-related tasks. Indeed, some 17% of workers report that they "hardly ever" use the internet on a typical day for work-related tasks, while 25% report that they "never" use the internet for this reason.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Workers turn to social media for a range of reasons while at work, with taking a mental break and connecting with friends and family being among the most common.

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 2: The Role of Media in American Politics; Author: Dr. Michael Kryzanek 

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 2: The Role of Media in American Politics; Author: Dr. Michael Kryzanek 

# data[].attributes.body
Discusses the effect social media has in politics with political figures. Many of them nowadays rely on social media to get a message through, or to push support for their campaign since the app allows news to travel widely and quickly. It also discusses media distrust, and how the growing generation is trusting too much in the media for actual news, and being misled by false information.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From the revolutionary days of Sam Adams attacking British control of Boston with incendiary newspaper columns in the Boston Gazette to the modern era where major television outlets and countless Internet sites promote political parties, candidates for public office and policy issues from various ideological perspectives, the United States is a country that has embraced freedom of the press. Throughout our history the character and direction of politics has been influenced by a wide range of opinion makers, scandal mongers, muckrakers, image shapers, propagandists, rabble rousers, and truth tellers. Whether through newspapers, radio talk shows, television programming, citizen websites, and comedy performances, Americans are regularly exposed to political commentary and criticism designed to shape their thinking and their vote.

Often called the Fourth Estate, suggesting that the modern media is an extra-constitutional branch of the government, the individuals and corporate entities that control the various sectors of the news and commentary have become a powerful force in American politics. Those seeking public office, or the advancement of key public policies, rely upon the media to get their message out to the citizenry. In today's media world, forming a campaign strategy, advancing a legislative proposal, promoting issue-based lobbying or influencing public opinion formation requires a core ingredient of communication and media.

While the goals of the modern media are wide ranging and multi-purposed, the question that is central to the role of these sources of information and commentary is whether the messaging presented is accurate, honest and balanced. Increasingly, critics of the media state that major sources of the news too often favor one party, one candidate and one point of view, creating rampant and biased "misinformation" that is compounded by a failure to "fact check" what viewers see and hear. The news of the day is too often not a transparent presentation of political positions or policies, but rather a partisan and ideological commentary designed to influence voter preferences.

The charges and countercharges leveled against media sites are often the result of market share competition between conservative cable networks such as Fox and Newsmax and the liberal networks of MSNBC and CNN. The Fox network has been singled out as the "voice" of the MAGA movement associated with Donald Trump, while MSNBC is viewed as the liberal critic of Trump and his MAGA voter base. Fox and its prime-time commentators such as Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham are some of the main 2020 election deniers of Biden's victory and use their program slot to condemn the President and his administration on hot button issues such as immigration, crime and inflation. MSNBC and its lead commentators Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell constantly attack former President Trump as unfit for office and a threat to democratic government.

The partisan and ideological divisions that describe the current media landscape in the United States has led to a significant decline in citizen trust and reliance on traditional sources of the news. A Gallup poll which tracked American's trust in the media from 1972-2023 found that only 32% of the population had "a great deal" of confidence that the media reports the news in a full, fair and accurate way, while 39% of Americans responded that they don't trust the media at all. It is interesting to point out that the Gallup study found the media channel that garnered the most trust was the Weather Channel. Also, a recent Pew Research study found that U.S. adults under 30 trust information from social media sites at about the same rate as traditional mainstream news outlets. Members of the Generation Z cohort rarely watch the evening news and rely on scrolling through their iPhone for timely information. What is even more disturbing than the decline of traditional sources of the news is mounting evidence that Americans are ignoring all sources of the mainstream news as they claim to be turned off by what they believe is journalistic bias. If they do seek out the news or political commentary, these skeptics often visit Internet sites that are on the extreme fringes of the ideological spectrum and have little commitment to providing fact-based information.

The lack of trust in the media coupled with a growing reliance on non-mainstream sources of the news has created a nation of ill-informed citizens who are too often swayed by politicians and commentators skilled in persuasive politics. Rather than researching a statement made by a politician or commentator, too many Americans are influenced by the image, the presentation and the passion of those making a political argument. For example, the mainstream media regularly presented extensive and reliable evidence that Joe Biden had indeed won the 2020 presidential election, and yet thousands of Americans accepted the election denying statements of politicians and commentators as fact. Mistrust of the media was often cited as the cause of the election denying position.

Freedom of the press is one of our most cherished rights as American. The ability of media entities and indeed average citizens to express opinions, promote a cause or share the news is a central component of our democratic way of life. But today in our polarized political arena, freedom of the press is threatened by those who would use this precious right to evade the truth, advance radical causes, and weaken the ability of government to function honestly and effectively. Gone are the days of watching the evening news and accepting what was presented by commentators as fact. Now we live in a world of multiple sources of information that too many times is not factual but what has come to be called "alternative facts." For our democracy to survive and prosper, it is essential to return to the days of trust in the media and belief that what is presented to us is indeed the truth. But to return to that trust and truth, the media must recommit itself to honesty and integrity - not an easy task.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Role of the Media in American Politics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From the revolutionary days of Sam Adams attacking British control of Boston with incendiary newspaper columns in the Boston Gazette to the modern era where major television outlets and countless Internet sites promote political parties, candidates for public office and policy issues from various ideological perspectives, the United States is a country that has embraced freedom of the press.

# data[].attributes.body
“Social Media Addiction and Lie Concept from a Psychological Perspective.” Current Approaches in Psychiatry / Psikiyatride Guncel Yaklasimlar, vol. 17, no. 1, Jan. 2025, pp. 84–94.

Deligöz, Eda.

EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1431201.

Deligoz describes the heightened impact of Social Media on mental health, underlining it's affect on being the catalyst to certain disorders and issues with mental health.

-“As the dissonance between online identities and real-life selves increases, individuals may develop depression, anxiety disorders and even narcissistic tendencies,” ( Deligoz, 86).

-“Thus, the proliferation of lying on digital platforms is not only an individual problem, but also carries risks for the mental health of society,” (Deligoz, 86).

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 3: The Emergence of Deepfake Technology - A Review; Author: Mika Westerlund 

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 3: The Emergence of Deepfake Technology - A Review; Author: Mika Westerlund 

# data[].attributes.body
He discusses the issues of Deepfake Technology and how its growing advancements are starting to increase danger for individuals' privacy and security. He includes the facts of how DeepFake are made, the pros and cons, possible threats, and current examples.

# data[].attributes.body
"Policy Implications." Deepfakes and Synthetic Media in the Financial System: Assessing Threat Scenarios, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2020, pp. 26–32.

Bateman, Jon

http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep25783.14.

This specific source describes the impact of deepfakes, AI images and videos that impersonate people. This AI tool, although negative, has been used on various online platforms, causing misinformation, and impacting various people using these platforms. This has had significant detriment to the emotional and mental well being of users.

“Someone then views that media and responds—for example, by believing and acting upon a deepfake. Finally, an indirect victim affected by the synthetic media may also seek to respond—for example, the person depicted in a deepfake seeks to refute the narrative. Although detailed policy prescriptions are outside the scope of this paper, this sequence of events could provide a basic framework for organizing policy responses. Each event engages different stakeholders and therefore offers distinct opportunities for policy responses (see table 2 for a simple overview). Of course, specific interventions each have costs and limitations as well as potential benefits. Many of these interventions are already being explored or could draw on existing measures

for countering financial harm and disinformation,” (Bateman, 30).

“thetic media is unlikely to threaten global financial stability or the macroeconomy—but individual people, companies, and government institutions are vulnerable,” (Bateman, 32).

# data[].attributes.body
“Mental Health and AI.” Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, vol. 77, no. 3, 2024, pp. 12–13. JSTOR.

Carter, Kate.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/27304418.

This specific source is being added as it also pertains to Joanna's IRR, it discusses the lack of humanity of AI, but also how it can impact the job market, which can also connect with Joanna's research.

"thers envisioned AI as an eventual replacement for human providers, especially for individuals currently receiving insufficient care. A mix of AI technologists and human practitioners initiated another discussion about providing treatment that was ethical and equitable. Some participants expressed skepticism about AI’s lack of humanity, asking questions like whether an entity that will never experience death can effectively provide comfort," (Carter 13)

# data[].attributes.body
“Social Media and Mental Health.” The American Economic Review, vol. 112, no. 11, 2022, pp. 3660–93.

Braghieri, Luca, et al.

JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27181537.

Braghieri explores the negative psychological effects of social media, arguing that the AI algorithms behind it can have a negative effect. He underscores this through his case study where he has students use Facebook, and monitors the results, consistent with the hypothesis that it has a detrimental effect to their mental health.

-“We find that the rollout of Facebook at a college

had a negative impact on student mental health. It also increased the

likelihood with which students reported experiencing impairments

to academic performance due to poor mental health,” (Braghieri, 3660).

-“Overall, our results are consistent with the hypothesis that social media might be

partly responsible for the recent deterioration in mental health among teenagers and

young adults. It is up to social media platforms, regulators, and future research to

determine whether and how these effects can be alleviated,” (Braghieri, 3690).

# data[].attributes.headline
“SHAPE GLOBAL NORMS FOR AI USE.” The American AI Century: A Blueprint for Action, Center for a New American Security by Martijn Rasser et al. (source 1)

# data[].attributes.subject
“SHAPE GLOBAL NORMS FOR AI USE.” The American AI Century: A Blueprint for Action, Center for a New American Security by Martijn Rasser et al. (source 1)

# data[].attributes.body
Goes into details about potential solutions: such as the Title IX and adapting old regulations (OPEN Data Act).

Provides examples and evidence.

Rasser discusses potential solutions and makes pros and cons lists for the AI regulations. “Congress should modernize P.L. 101-246, Title IX, which ‘restricts the U.S. licensing of exports and re-exports of crime control and crime detection equipment and instruments listed in the Export Administration Regulations to China’” (Rasser et. al 5).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.headline
 ““Artificial Intelligence in Social Media.”” International Journal of Scientific Advances, Matthew Sadiku (Source 2)

# data[].attributes.subject
 ““Artificial Intelligence in Social Media.”” International Journal of Scientific Advances, Matthew Sadiku (Source 2)

# data[].attributes.body
Goes into details on the science of AI

He discusses how companies use AI and for what reasons

Matthew N.O. Sadiku, author of well known science textbooks and major in Electrical and Electronics Engineers said as AI becomes more widely used in social media “for ecommerce, customer service, marketing, public relations, and more, the applications of artificial intelligence in social media companies are many”

# data[].attributes.headline
Source 4: Social Media and News Fact Sheet; Author: Pew Research Center 

# data[].attributes.subject
Source 4: Social Media and News Fact Sheet; Author: Pew Research Center 

# data[].attributes.body
It discusses the statistics and data it gained from surveys showing how much people rely on social media for news (what social media apps, the percentage, graphs, data charts, etc.) It also shows which people fit in each category.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Pew Research Center's Journalism Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Digital news has become an important part of Americans’ news media diets, with social media playing a crucial role in news consumption. Today, half of U.S. adults get news at least sometimes from social media. When it comes to where Americans regularly get news on social media, Facebook outpaces all…

# data[].attributes.headline
 “Social Media Regulation How Should We Decide What Speech Is Acceptable/Unacceptable on Social Media?” by Ryan Kennedy. (Source 3)

# data[].attributes.subject
 “Social Media Regulation How Should We Decide What Speech Is Acceptable/Unacceptable on Social Media?” by Ryan Kennedy. (Source 3)

# data[].attributes.body
Goes into details about a solution including creating an agency.

Discusses limitations and context information

Dr. Ryan Kennedy, University of Houston Machine-Assisted Human Decision-making says "One option for doing so would be to create an agency that would develop the standards and monitor compliance, or to task an existing agency, like the Federal Communications Commission, with this work" (Kennedy et al. 11).

# data[].attributes.headline
““Disclosure Standards for Social Media and Generative Artificial Intelligence Research: Toward Transparency and Replicability.”” Ganna Kostygina et al. (Source 4)

# data[].attributes.subject
““Disclosure Standards for Social Media and Generative Artificial Intelligence Research: Toward Transparency and Replicability.”” Ganna Kostygina et al. (Source 4)

# data[].attributes.body
Discusses AI in Social Media

Provides background information on AI in social media, current regulations and how AI could impact people.

They propose a solution of greater regulations on AI.

AI technologies introduce new problems for social data research. “For instance, competition between such social media platforms and generative AI systems resulted in growing restrictions of social media data access and use (e.g., for X—formerly Twitter— and Reddit) for academic, organic, and commercial users due to unlicensed or unauthorized use of copyrighted proprietary digital data by these systems to train their generative AI models or build algorithms (Vincent, 2023)" (Kostygina 2).

# data[].attributes.body
With the team's solution some of the following limitations that might exist is that deepfakes are getting harder and harder to detect and decipher from real ones, which could lead to many harmless and non-deepfake videos to be targeted and taken down, limiting free speech. It could also cause real deepfake videos to continue staying up, since it wasn't detected. Especially with increasing advancements of deepfakes, it is a probability that they could become made so that they aren't detected under the social media regulations on deepfakes too, finding a loophole and completing going against the whole purpose of these policies. Deepfakes could also potentially go viral and be seen by multiple people before being taken down as well, leading the purpose of these policies also being useless again. These social media regulations would also have to figure out the best way to even detect these deepfakes amongst the millions and millions of videos posted. People could also find other loopholes where deepfakes would then be posted on websites (not related to social media) on the internet, where if found it could still impact a few people. A few people might also be angered by these new policies social media is establishing, saying that it is going against the 1st Amendment of their Freedom of Speech.

# data[].attributes.body
Some of the pros that the second solution has is that since it is establishing regulations by the government, it would help to establish these regulations and limitations on the threats of deepfake AI among all platforms and scenarios in the United States. This includes not only social media, but the internet itself, and the availability of even allowing these deepfakes to become easily accessible anyway. The reason why so many deepfakes are even increasing is due to the fact that it is becoming more and more easily available to everyone. Anyone with even just little to no experience could create a deepfake right away, causing it to become a huge issue when fallen into the wrong hands. It would to restrict crime, and soon be able to promote more trust with the news and media. It would also be able to limit deepfakes in other areas not related to social media, such as in dark websites, television, and more. These are the pros that come with the second solution.

# data[].attributes.body
A few of the cons that come when trying to follow the second solution in having the government create stricter regulations on deepfake AI's would be that it could start to affect areas where deepfake AI was actually used in a beneficial way. This can include areas of filmmaking, saving lots of time in answering straightforward questions, sparking creativity and ideas within individuals, etc. Having this whole government regulation could also spark frustration and resentment from the public, as they would see this as a violation of the 1st Amendment, saying the US Government was limiting their Freedom of Speech. It would also lead to a few criticisms, as having these strict regulations could also negatively impact the growth and innovation of America, as mentioned by a few sources according to Berry's IRR essay. These are literally technological advancements, and advancements are how America was able to come up with a lot of ideas, information, and etc., and by limiting the advancement of this technology was like limiting the space for America to continue growing and moving forward with new ideas that are to come. These are a few of the cons that come with the second solution.

# data[].attributes.body
Some of the pros that the team solution has is that since it is targeting social media platforms, it would help to establish strict regulations and limitations on how AI can collect, store, and share personal data. This includes not only social media but also third-party apps and advertisers that rely on AI-driven data analysis to track users’ online activities. The reason why privacy concerns have increased is due to the fact that AI algorithms are becoming more advanced in gathering and predicting user behavior, often without explicit consent. By enforcing government regulations, it would help to restrict the misuse of personal information and reduce the risk of identity theft, data breaches, and unauthorized surveillance. It would also be able to promote more transparency between social media companies and users, ensuring that AI systems operate under ethical guidelines. Additionally, it would limit AI’s ability to manipulate user content, preventing misinformation and targeted manipulation through algorithmic bias.

# data[].attributes.body
Some of the cons that the team solution has is that since it is targeting social media platforms, it could lead to government overreach and excessive control over how AI is used online. This includes not only social media but also other digital spaces where AI is integrated, potentially limiting innovation and technological advancements. The reason why AI has been widely adopted is due to the fact that it makes the user experience better, helps businesses grow, and improves content recommendations (or the algorithm). By enforcing strict government regulations, it would risk slowing down AI development and making it harder for companies to compete globally. It would also raise concerns about censorship, as increased regulation could lead to the suppression of certain content or opinions of protecting privacy. Additionally, it could create challenges for smaller social media companies that lack the resources to comply with complex AI regulations, making it more difficult for new platforms to emerge.

# data[].attributes.body
Some of the implications that the team solution has is that since it focuses on regulating artificial intelligence on social media, it would reshape how platforms handle user data and AI-generated content. This includes not only implementing stricter privacy policies but also mandating companies to be more transparent about their AI algorithms and how they use personal information. The reason why this could have a major impact is due to the fact that it would force large companies to adjust their work which could potentially lead to resistance or legal challenges. By enforcing these regulations, it could lead to improved online security and reduce the spread of misinformation, but it may also create limitations on how AI can be used for personalization and engagement. It would also require increased government oversight, which could raise concerns about who controls the digital world and how much influence the government should have over private companies. Additionally, this solution could set a precedent for future AI regulations beyond social media, affecting other industries such as marketing, healthcare, and finance.