Jonas R. Kunst

CY
h-index97
3papers
31citations
Novelty63%
AI Score50

3 Papers

CYFeb 13
How cyborg propaganda reshapes collective action

Jonas R. Kunst, Kinga Bierwiaczonek, Meeyoung Cha et al.

The distinction between genuine grassroots activism and automated influence operations is collapsing. While policy debates focus on bot farms, a distinct threat to democracy is emerging via partisan coordination apps and artificial intelligence-what we term 'cyborg propaganda.' This architecture combines large numbers of verified humans with adaptive algorithmic automation, enabling a closed-loop system. AI tools monitor online sentiment to optimize directives and generate personalized content for users to post online. Cyborg propaganda thereby exploits a critical legal shield: by relying on verified citizens to ratify and disseminate messages, these campaigns operate in a regulatory gray zone, evading liability frameworks designed for automated botnets. We explore the collective action paradox of this technology: does it democratize power by 'unionizing' influence (pooling the reach of dispersed citizens to overcome the algorithmic invisibility of isolated voices), or does it reduce citizens to 'cognitive proxies' of a central directive? We argue that cyborg propaganda fundamentally alters the digital public square, shifting political discourse from a democratic contest of individual ideas to a battle of algorithmic campaigns. We outline a research agenda to distinguish organic from coordinated information diffusion and propose governance frameworks to address the regulatory challenges of AI-assisted collective expression.

47.8CLMay 1
Can AI Debias the News? LLM Interventions Improve Cross-Partisan Receptivity but LLMs Overestimate Their Own Effectiveness

Faisal Feroz, Jonas R. Kunst

Partisan news media erode cross-partisan trust, but large language models (LLMs) offer a potential means of debiasing such content at scale. Across two pre-registered experiments, we tested whether LLM-generated debiasing of liberal news headlines could improve conservative readers' trust-relevant judgments. Study 1 found that subtle lexical debiasing (replacing emotive words with more moderate synonyms) had no effect on any outcome. Study 2 found that a more substantive reframing intervention significantly increased conservatives' perceived trustworthiness, completeness, and willingness to engage with liberal news headlines, without producing a backfire effect among a sample of liberals. In Study 1, the intervention produced robust effects among LLM-simulated silicon participants, whereas it had no impact on human readers. In Study 2, the intervention's effects among silicon participants aligned directionally with human responses but were significantly larger in magnitude for some outcomes. Moderation analyses revealed that the model's implicit theory of who responds to debiasing diverged from the psychological profile that actually predicted human responsiveness. These findings demonstrate that LLM-based debiasing can improve cross-partisan receptivity when targeting ideological framing rather than surface-level language, but that current models lack both the quantitative accuracy and qualitative psychological fidelity to evaluate their own interventions without human oversight.

CYMay 18, 2025
How Malicious AI Swarms Can Threaten Democracy: The Fusion of Agentic AI and LLMs Marks a New Frontier in Information Warfare

Daniel Thilo Schroeder, Meeyoung Cha, Andrea Baronchelli et al.

Public opinion manipulation has entered a new phase, amplifying its roots in rhetoric and propaganda. Advances in large language models (LLMs) and autonomous agents now let influence campaigns reach unprecedented scale and precision. Researchers warn AI could foster mass manipulation. Generative tools can expand propaganda output without sacrificing credibility and inexpensively create election falsehoods that are rated as more human-like than those written by humans. Techniques meant to refine AI reasoning, such as chain-of-thought prompting, can just as effectively be used to generate more convincing falsehoods. Enabled by these capabilities, another disruptive threat is emerging: swarms of collaborative, malicious AI agents. Fusing LLM reasoning with multi-agent architectures, these systems are capable of coordinating autonomously, infiltrating communities, and fabricating consensus cheaply. By adaptively mimicking human social dynamics, they threaten democracy.