Between Trust, Risk, And Innovation: Managing Artificial Intelligence Narratives on The Digital Platforms of Georgian Traditional Media
Mariam Kebadze
Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
Tbilisi, Georgia
https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0678-4882
ABSTRACT
Artificial intelligence has become a visible issue of public communication, raising questions not only about technological progress, but also about trust, risk, responsibility and innovation. This article examines how artificial intelligence narratives are organized on the digital platforms of Georgian traditional media. It focuses on three interrelated narrative dimensions: trust, risk and innovation, and approaches AI-related coverage as a public communication management issue rather than merely as a topic of media representation.
The study is based on a mixed content analysis of 195 valid AI-related publications selected from an initial audit of 230 coding cards. The corpus includes materials published on the digital platforms of four Georgian traditional media outlets: 1TV.ge, Euronews Georgia, Imedi News and Rustavi 2. Each publication was coded according to its dominant content category, while additional analytical attention was given to technological objects, functional emphases, risk elements, trust-related issues and media literacy components.
The findings show that AI-related coverage is dominated by technological and business-oriented news, which accounts for 93 publications, or 47.7% of the analyzed corpus. However, the coverage is not uniformly optimistic. Risk-oriented and verification-related narratives are also visible: the “myth-nightmare” category includes 36 publications, global political competition and information war accounts for 24 publications, and media literacy or fact-checking appears as the dominant category in 26 publications. The “myth-idyll” category, which presents AI through strongly positive or idealized expectations, accounts for 16 publications.
The article argues that Georgian traditional media’s digital platforms organize AI narratives through an uneven but significant interaction of innovation, risk and trust. In a small-language media environment, this narrative structure matters because traditional media platforms remain important intermediaries through which global AI developments are translated into local public communication. Responsible AI communication therefore requires not only frequent coverage, but also balanced explanation of technological opportunities, limitations, risks and accountability mechanisms
Downloads
References
Assenmacher, D., Clever, L., Frischlich, L., Quandt, T., Trautmann, H., & Grimme, C. (2020). Demystifying social bots: On the intelligence of automated social media actors. Social Media + Society, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120939264
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610-623). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
D’Angelo, P. (2002). News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: A response to Entman. Journal of Communication, 52(4), 870-888. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02578.x
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Official Journal of the European Union, L 2024/1689. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj
Gillespie, T. (2014). The relevance of algorithms. In T. Gillespie, P. J. Boczkowski, & K. A. Foot (Eds.), Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society (pp. 167-194). MIT Press.
Gorwa, R., & Guilbeault, D. (2020). Unpacking the social media bot: A typology to guide research and policy. Policy & Internet, 12(2), 225-248. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.184
Guzman, A. L., & Lewis, S. C. (2020). Artificial intelligence and communication: A human-machine communication research agenda. New Media & Society, 22(1), 70-86.
Hancock, J. T., Naaman, M., & Levy, K. (2020). AI-mediated communication: Definition, research agenda, and ethical considerations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 25(1), 89-100.
Krippendorff, K. (2019). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
McCombs, M. (2005). A look at agenda-setting: Past, present and future. Journalism Studies, 6(4), 543-557.
McCombs, M. E., Llamas, J. P., Lopez-Escobar, E., & Rey, F. (2000). Candidate images in Spanish elections: Second-level agenda-setting effects. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(4), 703-717.
McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
OpenAI. (2023). GPT-4 technical report [Preprint]. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.08774
Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103-122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x
Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00326.x
Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. SAGE Publications.
Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G. L., Varol, O., Yang, K.-C., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2018). The spread of low-credibility content by social bots. Nature Communications, 9, Article 4787. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06930-7
Yang, K.-C., & Menczer, F. (2024). Anatomy of an AI-powered malicious social botnet. Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media, 4. https://doi.org/10.51685/jqd.2024.icwsm.7
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
_(1).png){kind=small}
.svg_1.jpg){kind=small}
.png)
