> Historically, elites could shape support only through limited instruments like schooling and mass media

Schooling and mass media are expensive things to control. Surely reducing the cost of persuasion opens persuasion up to more players?

▲

ben_w a day ago | parent | next [-]

> Schooling and mass media are expensive things to control

Expensive to run, sure. But I don't see why they'd be expensive to control. Most UK are required to support collective worship of a "wholly or mainly of a broadly christian character"[0], and used to have Section 28[1] which was interpreted defensively in most places and made it difficult even discuss the topic in sex ed lessons or defend against homophobic bullying.

USA had the Hays Code[2], the FCC Song[3] is Eric Idle's response to being fined for swearing on radio. Here in Europe we keep hearing about US schools banning books for various reasons.

[0] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hays_Code

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_Song

▲

alwa a day ago | parent [-]

[0] seems to be dated 1994–is it still current? I’m curious how it’s evolved (or not) through the rather dramatic demographic shifts there over the intervening 30 years

	▲	ben_w a day ago \| parent [-]
		So far as I can tell, it's still around. That's why I linked to the .gov domain rather than any other source. Though I suppose I could point at legislation.gov.uk: • https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22wholly+or+mainly+of+a+broadly+c... • https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/31/schedule/20/cro...

▲

ares623 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Mass Persuasion needs two things: content creation and distribution.

Sure AI could democratise content creation but distribution is still controlled by the elite. And content creation just got much cheaper for them.

▲

zmgsabst a day ago | parent [-]

Distribution isn’t controlled by elites; half of their meetings are seething about the “problem” people trust podcasts and community information dissemination rather than elite broadcast networks.

We no longer live in the age of broadcast media, but of social networked media.

	▲	ares623 a day ago \| parent [-]
		But the social networks are owned by them though?

▲

crote a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do you rather want a handful of channels with well-known biases, or thousands of channels of unknown origin?

If you're trying to avoid being persuaded, being aware of your opponents sounds like the far better option to me.

▲

teekert a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Exactly my first thought, maybe AI means the democratization of persuasion? Printing press much?

Sure the the Big companies have all the latest coolness. But also don't have a moat.

▲

zmgsabst a day ago | parent | prev [-]

This is my opinion, as well:

- elites already engage in mass persuasion, from media consensus to astroturfed thinktanks to controlling grants in academia

- total information capacity is capped, ie, people only have so much time and interest

- AI massively lowers the cost of content, allowing more people to produce it

Therefore, AI is likely to displace mass persuasion from current elites — particularly given public antipathy and the ability of AI to, eg, rapidly respond across the full spectrum to existing influence networks.

In much the same way podcasters displaced traditional mass media pundits.