Pawelec Maria
Department of Society, Culture and Technological Change, International Center for Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities (IZEW), University of Tübingen, Wilhelmstrasse 19, 72074 Tübingen, Germany.
Digit Soc. 2022;1(2):19. doi: 10.1007/s44206-022-00010-6. Epub 2022 Sep 8.
Observers fear that deepfakes will shake the very foundations of democracy. Notwithstanding, in-depth scholarly analyses of deepfakes' political impact are rare, and do not consider theories of democracy. This contribution helps close this research gap, drawing on Warren's problem-oriented democracy theory, as well as theories of deliberative democracy and contributions on the role of trust in democracies. I identify three core functions of democratic systems and their normative foundations, namely empowered inclusion, collective agenda and will formation (supported by deliberation), and collective decision-making. Based on a literature and media analysis, I systematize different types of deepfakes serving either disinformation or hate speech and outline how they weaken core democratic functions and norms: Deepfakes impede citizens' empowered inclusion in debates and decisions that affect them, e.g. by hampering efforts to hold political representatives accountable or further marginalizing certain societal groups such as women or ethnic minorities. Deepfakes also undermine collective agenda and will formation by threatening the epistemic quality of deliberation as well as citizens' mutual empathy and respect. This culminates in a decreased legitimacy of collective decisions taken, which is additionally threatened by pervasive (but mostly speculative) fears of deepfake election manipulation. My analysis has implications for (future) governance efforts addressing deepfakes. Such efforts are increasing, e.g. on the part of social media platforms, but also (supra-)national regulatory bodies.
观察人士担心，深度伪造技术将动摇民主的根基。尽管如此，对深度伪造技术的政治影响进行深入学术分析的情况却很少见，而且这些分析并未考虑民主理论。本文借助沃伦的问题导向型民主理论、协商民主理论以及关于信任在民主制度中作用的相关论述，有助于填补这一研究空白。我确定了民主制度的三个核心功能及其规范基础，即赋权参与、集体议程和意志形成（通过协商予以支持）以及集体决策。基于文献和媒体分析，我对用于虚假信息或仇恨言论的不同类型深度伪造技术进行了系统化梳理，并概述了它们如何削弱民主的核心功能和规范：深度伪造技术阻碍公民有意义地参与影响自身的辩论和决策，例如妨碍追究政治代表责任的努力，或进一步边缘化某些社会群体，如妇女或少数族裔。深度伪造技术还通过威胁协商的认知质量以及公民之间的相互同理心和尊重，破坏集体议程和意志形成。这最终导致集体决策的合法性降低，而普遍存在（但大多是猜测性的）对深度伪造选举操纵的担忧进一步威胁到这种合法性。我的分析对（未来）应对深度伪造技术的治理努力具有启示意义。此类努力正在增加，例如社交媒体平台以及（超）国家监管机构都在采取行动。
