ROLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGIES IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE


DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2415-881x.2025.99.166-178

Volodymyr Rusinov

Abstract


The article examines the role of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in political discourse and the processes of public opinion formation. It analyzes how generative models, in particular systems such as ChatGPT, change the way political information is created, disseminated and perceived. Attention is paid to the historical stages of the use of algorithms in political campaigns, starting from personalized content promotion systems to modern generative technologies. It is established that AI is not only a tool for automating information processes and increasing the effectiveness of political campaigns, but also a factor capable of forming new meanings, changing discursive frameworks and influencing collective perceptions through the manipulation of context, text tone and emotional coloring of messages, which calls into question traditional ideas about the authenticity of political communication.
The risks associated with disinformation, emotional impact and political bias of AI models are considered. It is established that the combination of generated text and synthetic images creates a qualitatively new level of influence on public opinion. Separately, ethical challenges related to the issues of transparency in the use of AI, the legitimacy of democratic choice under algorithmic decision-making, and the preservation of human subjectivity in political processes are analyzed. The role of social networks as the main channel for distributing generated materials is outlined, and the importance of visual content (images, videos) created by AI in amplifying political messages is emphasized. The article provides examples of regulating the use of AI in political processes, in particular, an analysis of the approaches of the European Union and the United States. It is noted that the introduction of legislative frameworks, such as the AI Act and the Digital Services Act, is aimed at ensuring the transparency of mandatory labeling of AI-generated content and protecting democratic processes from manipulation.
The results demonstrate that AI creates opportunities for the democratization of political influence through hyper-personalization and automation, allowing small political forces to compete with traditional parties. The active use of technologies for content generation and audience targeting in the 2024 elections is established. The limitations of AI in a polarized society are identified: difficulties in creating inclusive dialogue and the paradox between universal and targeted messages. The key challenges are identified as transparency of use, political bias of models and legitimacy of algorithmic influence. It is proven that artificial intelligence is the next major stage in the digital transformation of the political space after personal computers and smartphones.


Keywords


political discourse; artificial intelligence; political influence; political communication; disinformation

References


Gorbenko, N. Yu. (2023). Political discourse: essence, features and functions. Current problems of philosophy and sociology, (4), 166-171. https://apfs.onu.edu.ua/article/view/286439 [in Ukrainian].

Cadwalladr, C., & Graham-Harrison, E. (2018, March 17). Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election [in English].

Persily, N. (2017). The 2016 U.S. election: Can democracy survive the internet? Journal of Democracy, 28(2), 63–76. https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/the-2016-u-s-election-can-democracy-survive-the-internet/

Ferrara, E., Varol, O., Davis, C., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2016). The rise of social bots. Communications of the ACM, 59(7), 96–104. https://cacm.acm.org/research/the-rise-of-social-bots/

Woolley, S. C., & Howard, P. N. (2016). Automation, algorithms, and politics: Political communication, computational propaganda, and autonomous agents—Introduction. International Journal of Communication, 10, 9. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/6298 [in English].

Bai, H., Voelkel, J. G., Muldowney, S., Eichstaedt, J. C., & Willer, R. (2025). LLM-generated messages can persuade humans on policy issues. Nature Communications, 16(1), Article 6037. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-61345-5

Tretter, M. (2025). Opportunities and challenges of AI-systems in political decision-making contexts. Frontiers in Political Science, 7, Article 1504520. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2025.1504520/full

Puzynina, E., & Kučera, P. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence and politics: Ethical and democratic implications. Philosophies, 10(5), Article 95. https://www.mdpi.com/2409-9287/10/5/95

Sætra, H. S. (2021). A typology of AI applications in politics. In Artificial intelligence and its contexts: Security, business and governance (pp. 27–43). Springer International Publishing. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-88972-2_

Woolley, S. C. (2020). Bots and computational propaganda: Automation for communication and control. In N. Persily & J. A. Tucker (Eds.), Social media and democracy: The state of the field, prospects for reform (pp. 89–110). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/social-media-and-democracy/bots-and-computational-propaganda/F16B595C5F68AC09E0B52F19A2BAE2A7

Tallberg, J., Lundgren, M., & Geith, J. (2024). AI regulation in the European Union: examining non-state actor preferences. Business and Politics, 26(2), 218–239. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/business-and-politics/article/ai-regulation-in-the-european-union-examining-nonstate-actor-preferences/9E1B9C8F7A7E3F9A8B5D6C4E2F1A3B8D

Center for Media Engagement. (2024). Generative AI, elections and beyond. University of Texas at Austin. https://mediaengagement.org/research/generative-ai-elections-and-beyond/


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The editorial board does not always share the position of the authors. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the material presented.
All rights reserved.
© Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 2026