Pragyaapradh in Journalism and Society
Pragyaapradh or cognitive dissonance, presents a significant challenge to both journalism and society. It influences reporting, contributes to bias, and fuels misinformation, while also shaping how citizens perceive and engage with the world. By understanding its roots and effects, and by adopting strategies to counteract its influence, both journalists and the public can work toward a more informed, balanced, and harmonious society.
Recognising the impact of cognitive dissonance is the first step toward mitigating its effects. One important approach is awareness and education. Journalists and citizens alike should be trained in critical thinking and media literacy to help identify cognitive biases and their consequences. Understanding these psychological mechanisms can foster a more analytical and open-minded approach to information.
Encouraging open-mindedness is another essential strategy. Journalists should actively seek out diverse perspectives and engage with conflicting information rather than avoiding it. Similarly, citizens can benefit from exposing themselves to a variety of viewpoints, which can help reduce polarization and broaden their understanding of complex issues.
Fact-checking and accountability play a crucial role in reducing the spread of misinformation. Media organisations must prioritise rigorous verification of facts and demonstrate a willingness to correct errors transparently. When journalists admit and rectify mistakes, it strengthens public trust in the media.
A more holistic approach, drawing from Ayurvedic principles, can also be beneficial. Addressing cognitive dissonance requires acknowledging the interconnectedness of mind, body, and environment. Practices such as mindfulness, meditation, and self-reflection can help individuals reconnect with a more balanced state of consciousness, making them less susceptible to cognitive distortions.
Finally, fostering open dialogue between differing viewpoints is essential for reducing societal divisions. Constructive discussions that encourage empathy and understanding can help bridge ideological gaps and reduce the tendency toward tribalism. Creating spaces for respectful debate allows individuals to challenge their biases without feeling threatened.
Transforming journalism in common with all other professions, trade or calling is contingent upon an educated or trained mind. Elevating the mind to a state of epistemic faculty depends on shifting the mind from intellectuality to intelligence, requiring cultivating virtues, humility, open-mindedness and critical thinking. Journalists must engage in continuous self-reflection, interrogating their motivations and questioning the validity of their thoughts. For instance, before publishing a piece, a journalist should ask: Does this information stand up to scrutiny? Does it accurately inform, contribute positively to public discourse? Am I perpetuating harmful stereotypes? Such self-scrutiny fosters ethical journalism that serves society rather than exploiting it.
The cognitive limitations can distort journalism which is why it needs to evolve as a critical guardian of truth, with a grounding in deeper dimensions of mainly four key philosophical principles:
(a) Ontology – the nature of reality: Ontology enables journalists to discern real events from fabricated narratives. It helps journalists discern what is real amidst fabricated narratives.
(b) Epistemology – the pursuit and validation of knowledge: epistemology equips them with rigorous tools to verify truth and expose fallacies (Sunstein, 2014).
(c) Axiology ensures journalistic integrity and alignment with values such as fairness and public interest.
(d) Deontology emphasises accountability and a moral duty to safeguard societal trust (Ward, 2020).
Socratic inquiry, through its dialectic process of questioning assumptions, cultivates critical thinking and self-reflection – skills essential for journalists and audiences alike to resist misinformation. Similarly, Chanakya’s focus on pragmatic wisdom and ethical governance provides a framework for a protectionist approach to journalism, safeguarding society from epistemic chaos (Rangarajan, 1992, The Alan Turing Institute). By drawing on these traditions, journalists can transform their craft into a means of fostering an examined life, where truth is not static but an evolving understanding shaped by dialectical reasoning and scientific inquiry.
How Can AI Boost Epistemic Journalism?
- Automation of News Gathering and Reporting: AI can streamline journalism by automating labour-intensive processes like data collection, translation and transcription. Tools like Natural Language Processing (NLP) enable real-time transcription of interviews and analysis of large datasets, allowing journalists to focus on critical storytelling. AI-driven sentiment analysis can help journalists gauge public opinions on current affairs, facilitating nuanced reporting.
- Improved Fact-Checking: AI tools like machine learning models can cross-reference claims with extensive databases to identify falsehoods quickly. Platforms like PolitiFact and FactCheck.org already leverage AI for misinformation detection, bolstering epistemic security by upholding standards of accuracy and transparency.
- Data Journalism and Visualisation: AI enables data-driven journalism by analyzing complex datasets and generating intuitive visualisations. This enhances the clarity of reports on intricate issues like climate change, financial crises, or global pandemics, helping the public understand multifaceted problems.
- Personalised News Delivery: AI algorithms curate personalised news feeds, tailoring content to individual preferences. While this boosts engagement, ethical practices in algorithm design are essential to prevent information silos that can skew public understanding.
- Addressing Information Overload: By summarising complex reports and filtering noise from essential updates, AI can help audiences focus on substantive issues, thereby reinforcing informed public discourse.
Can AI Undermine Journalism?
- Proliferation of Misinformation and Deepfakes: AI tools can generate convincing fake news, doctored images, and deepfake videos, challenging journalists to verify authenticity and combat the rapid spread of falsehoods. This undermines trust in media and epistemic security by fostering doubt about credible sources.
b. Algorithmic Bias: AI systems trained on biased datasets may perpetuate or amplify existing prejudices, impacting how news is framed and disseminated. For instance, minority communities may be underrepresented or misrepresented due to algorithmic misjudgments.
c. Erosion of Editorial Judgment: Reliance on AI-generated content risks compromising editorial standards. Automated systems may prioritise clickbait headlines over substantive journalism, diluting the quality of news and undermining journalistic integrity.
- Loss of Jobs in Journalism: Automation may displace human journalists, particularly in roles involving routine reporting. While AI can augment reporting, excessive dependence may weaken the diversity of perspectives that human journalists bring to the field.
- e. Echo Chambers and Polarisation: Personalised algorithms often reinforce user biases by showing content aligned with existing beliefs. This contributes to the formation of echo chambers and hinders epistemic security by narrowing the scope of public debate.
Balancing AI’s Role in Journalism
To leverage AI’s potential while mitigating its risks, several measures can be adopted:
- Ethical AI Development: Media organisations must collaborate with technologists to develop AI systems that uphold principles of fairness, transparency, and accountability.
- AI-Augmented Human Journalism: AI should assist, not replace, human journalists. This hybrid approach can combine the speed of automation with the ethical judgment and creativity of humans.
- Media Literacy and Public Awareness: Educating audiences about AI-generated content and misinformation is crucial to foster critical thinking and discernment in consuming news.
- Regulation and Oversight: Governments and industry bodies should establish guidelines to regulate the use of AI in journalism, ensuring adherence to standards of accuracy and impartiality.
AI has the potential to transform journalism and bolster epistemic security by enhancing efficiency, accuracy, and clarity in reporting. However, unchecked use of AI risks undermining these very standards, leading to the spread of misinformation, loss of public trust, and diminished journalistic quality. A balanced approach that integrates ethical practices, human oversight, and public education is essential to maximize the benefits of AI while safeguarding the principles of journalism and the integrity of epistemic security.
Understanding how bias affects the creation and consumption of mediatext. (Text, images, audio and video information, data, discourses, memes, cartoons, animation and films). Trusting media as a source of “original” or “virginal” news—news that is pure, unaltered, and free from any agenda—is a complex challenge.