About this Event
As AI makes the mass production of political messaging cheaper and easier than ever, understanding how language shapes democracy has never been more urgent. Professor Stephan Lewandowsky draws on large-scale computational analysis of political speech to explore how rhetoric reflects — and influences — the health of democracy. His research provides a timely lens for thinking about the risks AI poses to public discourse, political behaviour, and democratic institutions.
Abstract
Democracy is in retreat around the world. Even countries that were long considered exemplary democracies are not immune against autocratization. Here we apply the lens of large-scale computational linguistic analysis to illustrate and understand those trends. Language is crucial to democracy: it permits negotiation of power relations; it is used to compete on the “marketplace of ideas” to inform government policy. But language is also the tool of demagogues and autocrats to control the populace and suppress dissent. How does discourse in a democracy differ from the rhetoric of autocrats? Can we anticipate the decline of a democracy by analyzing its political discourse? We present several strands of research that illustrate how language mirrors the health of a democracy and how it can also be used to subvert democracy. We first show that the tacit conceptions of truth and honesty that are embodied in political speech are strong predictors of political performance and societal welfare. An analysis of U.S. Congressional speeches reveals that since the mid-1970s, rhetoric has shifted from being evidence-based to being intuition-based –that is, instead of appealing to data and facts, politicians have increasingly appealed to feelings and hunches when making political arguments. This shift has been accompanied by increasing societal inequality, decreased congressional productivity, and increased polarization. We next show that political speech can be linked to violence in several ways. For example, we show that the language of political manifestos can be used to predict whether a particular manifesto gave rise to political violence. Similarly, presidential falsehoods have been associated with political violence during the last 175 years. We also show that persuasive language can be tailored to exploit people's particular vulnerabilities based on their personality or other personal characteristics, providing an avenue for large-scale manipulation. When considered together, it is clear linguistic analysis of political speech provides an early window into democratic backsliding and autocratization.
About the Speaker
Prof. Stephan Lewandowsky
Professor of Cognitive Science, University of Bristol
Professor Stephan Lewandowsky is a cognitive scientist at the University of Bristol whose main interest is in the pressure points between the architecture of online information technologies and human cognition, and the consequences for democracy that arise from those pressure points.
He is the recipient of numerous awards and honours, including a Discovery Outstanding Researcher Award from the Australian Research Council, a Wolfson Research Merit Fellowship from the Royal Society, and a Humboldt Research Award from the Humboldt Foundation in Germany.
Professor Lewandowsky also frequently appears in print and broadcast media and has contributed around 100 opinion pieces to the global media. He has been working with policy makers at the European level for many years, and he was first author of a report on Technology and Democracy in 2020 that has helped shape EU digital legislation.
Event Venue & Nearby Stays
Melbourne Connect - Manhari Room, Level 7, 700 Swanston Street, Carlton, Australia
AUD 0.00
