Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper analyzes the framing of AI openness in 223 news articles from the U.S., France, and China, revealing inconsistencies and oversimplifications in media portrayals. The study finds that inaccurate terminology, misleading information, and a binary "open vs. closed" framing impede effective communication about AI openness. The authors highlight the media's focus on a limited number of models and call for the AI community to contribute to a more nuanced and accurate public discourse.
The media's coverage of AI openness is a mess of inaccurate terminology and misleading information, pushing a false "open vs. closed" narrative that obscures the real complexities.
In the last few years, there has been a rapid release of highly capable Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems labeled as “open” or “open source.” Openness in AI encompasses a wider range of practices than open source software: from AI systems with all components published publicly to those that only share model weights and prohibit certain uses. Today, embracing this concept is a contentious topic. Some argue that the benefits of openness outweigh its risks. Others believe open release of AI poses more risks to society. This “Open vs. Closed AI” debate has made headlines in major news outlets and has become a political topic. In this study, we analyze how AI openness is framed in the media through a qualitative analysis of 223 newspaper articles from the U.S., France, and China. We find that effective communication around this debate is hindered by inaccurate use of terminology, the presence of misleading information, and an either-or dichotomy of AI openness that does not reflect the complexity of AI system development. Our analysis also reveals significant heterogeneity across news sources, and that media discourse on AI openness focuses solely on a handful of models. The media can influence public opinion on AI, promote user adoption of certain models, and subsequently impact technology policy decisions. Therefore, we call on the AI community to help add clarity to the debate.