As a journalist, what makes me cold most is that news characters bypass the mainstream media, choose to publish major information on personal social media, and decline to ask further.From the perspective of the parties, under the trend of traditional media -style micro -micro -micro -micro -and -social media, this approach seems reasonable and natural, can also grasp the right to speak, and talk directly with the people to achieve multiple purposes.However, for professional media practitioners, this will inevitably make people feel contempt and not even respected.
So, in the early morning of July 22, Singapore time, when the US President Biden chose to issue the most important statement in his political career on social platform X (formerly known as Twitter), let traditional media compete for information and exhausted his life.At that time, I can appreciate the mood of peers in the United States.What makes the mainstream media feel helpless is that Biden's retirement shocking bomb also unexpectedly unexpectedly leaving the traffic dividend (the retirement post broke through 420 million times in three days) and gave it to the owner of X's owner Musk.The billions of wealthy people who publicly stood up Trump became the biggest winner of Bayeng's retreat.
Byndon chose to publish the news through X. He has his own personal considerations, but this may not be the most in line with the public interest. In particular, social media posts are easily tampered with maliciously and mislead the public.For example, in October last year, shortly after the outbreak of the Harbin conflict, a White House document that was shifted with flowers was circulated on the Internet, saying that Bayeng authorized State Secretary of State Brillin to provide Israeli national defense with a assistance of up to $ 8 billion (about S $ 10.7 billion).Many online media wrote news based on this document, which led to the wide spread of false information and boarded Google Hot Search, forcing the White House officials to rumors urgently.
Among the many false information, the most worrying thing is deep forgery, using videos or audio made by artificial intelligence (AI).According to statistics, there were at least 500,000 deep -pseudo videos and voice in the world's widely circulated in the world.During the severe and mental tight political election, these deep -fake contents are difficult to distinguish, and may be left and right, which may directly affect the election results.
For example, during the Indonesian election, the Gorca Party used deep -fake technology to "resurrect" former President Suhahdo to vote; in the United States, Trump's supporters generated and spread Trump and African votersTake a photo to encourage black voters to vote for the former president who advocated white supremacy.
In this post -facts that are no longer true, the legislative and regulatory authorities of various countries are scrambling to introduce policies to limit the use of AI audio, images and videos in elections.In December last year, the South Korean Parliament Committee amended the law to prohibit the political campaign videos made by the pseudo -pseudo -technology production 90 days before the election. Violators could be sentenced to seven years of imprisonment, or fined 50 million won (about S $ 50,000).In Singapore, Yang Liming, Minister of Digital Development and News and Second Minister of the Ministry of the Interior, said this month that the government will also study how to cope with the situation of artificial intelligence generating content for evil, including deep pseudo content that may occur during the election.
However, when AI has made false information become streets and lanes and extremely difficult guerrilla warfare, can the relevant norms and law respond to and effectively curb these threats in a timely manner?With the speed of information dissemination, can legislation and supervision keep up with the pace of scientific and technological development?How can countries find a balance between protecting the freedom of speech and maintaining public order in the process of formulating policies?At the crossroads of this information revolution, not only journalists, but the whole society must discuss and face the reality in front of them.
