encore 2025/2026 – research magazine on internet and society

encore MAGAZINE ON INTERNET AND SOCIETY VOLUME 2025/2026 ARTICLES Escaping the digitalisation backlog Populism, platforms and the challenges of science communication Who hired this bot? On the ambivalence of using generative AI in recruiting TAKING ACTION Strengthening democracy against polarisation Code of conduct on humanmachine decision-making Blueprint for collaborative and fair diamond open access Platform governance Artificial intelligence and society Science in times of polarised public issues Digital organising and the future of work Digitalisation and sustainability SELECTED CONTENT ON OUR FIVE RESEARCH TOPICS IN FOCUS EDITORIAL 2025 marked a breakthrough year for the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG). The Joachim Herz Foundation, the Stiftung Mercator and the Foundation Science and Democracy have committed to supporting our work in the years ahead. With new wind filling our sails, we are embarking on a bold new chapter, reshaping our research agenda to meet the urgent demands of digitalisation. However, this new momentum is not the only reason to celebrate! This issue of encore highlights our research’s impact beyond academia – we examine platform governance, uncover invisible content moderation labour, assess the social effects of AI, explore the realities of digital work, investigate sustainability in data-driven technologies and analyse science’s role in polarised debates. Our approach to scientific impact is a processual one. It entails the ongoing exchange and interaction between research and society, especially with those charting the course of digital transformation. As you will see, this includes collaborating with municipalities to tackle digitalisation backlogs, discussing sustainable use of AI in classrooms and engaging with European regulators on fair content moderation. We hope you enjoy reading! Björn Scheuermann, Director at HIIG Freia Kuper, Researcher at HIIG Katharina Mosene, Researcher at HIIG ACTIONABLE INSIGHTS Zine on platform regulation Spotlight: Disinformation and the German election Code of conduct on humanmachine decision-making Beyond Big Tech: National strategies for platform alternatives Inside content moderation : Humans, machines and invisible work SPECIAL ISSUE Content moderation on digital platforms: Beyond states and firms JELLA OHNESORGE Counting without accountability? An analysis of the DSA’s transparency reports FURTHER ARTICLES Debunking assumptions about disinformation : Rethinking what we think we know Pl Platform governance AI Artificial intelligence and society VISIT TOPIC OVERVIEW ONLINE FOCUS Platform governance refers to the rules, regulations and frameworks for managing digital platforms in our society. This includes social networks, online services, digital marketplaces or messaging services, to name a few. These digital platform ecosystems facilitate the exchange of information, goods and services in our daily lives. As an integral part of our modern communication, they also have a profound impact on public discourse. In our research on sustainable platform governance, we therefore examine how economic goals, individual rights and societal values can be aligned or at least harmonised in these online communication spaces. This includes questions related to online platform regulation, competition law, freedom of speech, individual autonomy and (democratically anchored) decision-making. Platform governance 7 encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Counting without accountability? Pl The Digital Services Act aims to hold platforms more accountable for illegal content by demanding greater transparency. Platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Tiktok or X must now publish detailed reports, showing, for example, how many posts they removed and how quickly. These reports are meant to give regulators, researchers and the public insight into how well platforms are enforcing the rules. But do the reports really deliver what they promise? Or is this measure just a new but ultimately useless addition to the flood of EU reports without any actual improvements in practice? JELLA OHNESORGE Counting without accountability? An analysis of the DSA’s transparency reports 8 Pl encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Counting without accountability? Online platforms like Instagram, TikTok or X have become an integral part of everyday life. However, despite their societal relevance, these privately owned platform companies remain largely opaque when it comes to understanding how they work. They rarely explain how they choose which content to distribute, remove or suppress, even though their decisions determine what we see online. HOLDING PLATFORMS ACCOUNTABLE One of the core aims of the new EU digital rulebook, including the Digital Services Act (DSA), is to regulate how platforms handle illegal content and enable more effective action against it. What constitutes illegal content is not explicitly codified in the DSA but rather ultimately depends on what is illegal under Union or Member State law. This often includes child sexual abuse material, incitement to terrorism, illegal hate speech or infringement of intellectual property rights. Platforms are to be held accountable for their reactions once they are made aware of illegal content. For example, if a user reports a post or video that they believe contains illegal hate speech, the platform must review the report and decide on an action such as deleting or restricting the post. Later, the platform must also disclose how many such cases were handled within a given timeframe and what they did about the reported content in a transparency report. One of the DSA’s main aims is to increase the accountability of platforms by promoting transparency. A key assumption underlying the DSA is 9 Pl encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Counting without accountability? that digital services may pose systemic risks to society. Examples of such risks include widespread disinformation and the undermining of electoral integrity. To identify and limit these risks at an early stage, maximum transparency is necessary. This is supposed to enable public authorities, researchers and civil society to recognise potential systemic risks, and allow individual users to understand and assert their rights. THE DSA’S TRANSPARENCY REPORTS Transparency reports are a key accountability measure under the DSA. Under Articles 15, 24 and 42, platforms must publish comprehensible reports on their content moderation activities. These reports must include information on the types of illegal content moderation and the actions taken. Content moderation actions can include deleting the content, demoting it or geo-blocking it in a specific country. The reports must be publicly available in a machine-readable format (Art. 15(1) DSA). Most platforms provide them as PDF documents or HTML pages on their websites. They are also collected and linked on an EU website (European Commission, 2025). But how much transparency do these reports actually provide? Are they really suited to uncover how platforms decide what to take down and what not to? And most importantly, are they an adequate measure to increase platform accountability? By analysing the transparency reports of selected online platforms, I argue that current transparency reports fall short of delivering true accountability with regard to the moderation of illegal content. Even though a new standardised reporting template has recently been introduced, 16 Pl encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Counting without accountability? that Article 15 of the DSA requires platforms to report how many notices they received under Article 16, and to categorise these by “any action taken pursuant to the notices” (Art. 15(1b) DSA). The new template, however, does not seem to include this requirement. FLAW 2: THE PROCESS OF MODERATING ILLEGAL CONTENT REMAINS LARGELY OPAQUE. Even when report data does show which actions came in response to which notices or reports, the underlying process remains a black box. Questions such as “What criteria are used to decide cases?” and “What legal expertise do content moderators have?” remain unanswered. Snapchat, for example, has received 82,011 Art. 16 notices for content that potentially violates rules against false information during the reporting period between January and June 2024. Out of these, 106 pieces of content were deleted, 255 accounts were issued warnings and 12 accounts were locked. Setting aside the absurdly low number of actual actions, it is impossible for us to know why Snapchat deleted content in some cases and not in others, or why it locked accounts in some cases and merely issued warnings in others. The new template does not ask for that kind of information. So, it is unlikely that we will see an improvement in this regard. FLAW 3: PLATFORM RULES REMAIN THE GOLD STANDARD. While it makes sense for efficiency reasons and is completely in line with the DSA, platforms still primarily check if content violates their own rules before 17 Pl encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Counting without accountability? or instead of focusing on EU or Member State law. However, this renders the separate mechanism for reporting illegal content frankly obsolete. It also raises questions about which rules are considered more important: those set by a private platform company or democratically legitimised laws. The new template cannot fundamentally challenge this hierarchy, nor does it make more visible the rules and criteria that platforms use to make content moderation decisions. Instead, the template further entrenches the already limited amount of information that platforms make available. THE TEMPLATE IS NOT THE SAVIOUR SOME MAKE IT OUT TO BE The analysis of the 2024 Transparency Reports from seven very large online platforms (VLOPs) (Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Snapchat, TikTok and X) reveals significant shortcomings in the way these companies report on the moderation of illegal content. Key data points are not connected, categories of illegal content are applied inconsistently and arbitrarily, and the reasoning behind content moderation remains largely opaque. These gaps make it difficult to assess how platforms actually respond to illegal content and thus to measure the adequacy and effectiveness of their response. Still, the newly introduced EU template for transparency reports is a step towards greater comparability and clarity as it standardises reporting formats and categories. It thereby may help reduce the inconsistency observed so far. However, the template leaves important blind spots unaddressed. Most notably, it does not require platforms to explain their reasoning behind moderation decisions or distinguish clearly between enforcement based 18 Pl encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Counting without accountability? on law versus internal rules. There might also be potential issues with platforms adhering only to the template’s minimum requirements, which could reinforce existing shortcomings and further limit the availability of meaningful information. Thus, neither the transparency reports nor the new template currently achieve accountability through transparency. EU REGULATIONS AND TEMPLATES European Commission (2025). Annex I – Transparency reports template [Microsoft Excel file]. Publications Office of the European Union. European Commission (2024). Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) laying down templates concerning the transparency reporting obligations of providers of intermediary services and of providers of online platforms under Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and the Council. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2024/2835/oj/eng European Commission (2022). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the European Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and Amending Directive 2000/31/EC (DSA). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj 19 Pl encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Counting without accountability? TRANSPARENCY REPORTS European Commission (2025). How the Digital Services Act enhances transparency online. Retrieved 20. September 2025, from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/dsabrings-transparency Facebook (2024). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 Digital Services Act Transparency Report for Facebook. April–September 2024. Facebook. https://transparency.meta.com/reports/ regulatory-transparency-reports Facebook (2025). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 Digital Services Act Transparency Report for Facebook. October–December 2024. Facebook. https://transparency.meta.com/reports/ regulatory-transparency-reports Instagram (2024). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 Digital Services Act Transparency Report for Instagram. April–September 2024. Instagram. https://transparency.meta.com/reports/ regulatory-transparency-reports Instagram (2025). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 Digital Services Act Transparency Report for Instagram. October–December 2024. Instagram. https://transparency.meta.com/reports/ regulatory-transparency-reports LinkedIn (2024). Digital Services Act Transparency Report. January–June 2024. LinkedIn. Retrieved 22.10.2025, from https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/a1678508 LinkedIn (2025). Digital Services Act Transparency Report. July–December 2024. LinkedIn. Retrieved 22.10.2025, from https://content.linkedin.com/content/dam/help/tns/en/ February-2025-DSA-Transparency-Report.pdf Pinterest (2024). Digital Services Act Transparency Report. January–June 2024. Pinterest. Retrieved 22.10.2025, from https://policy.pinterest.com/en/transparency-report-h1-2024 Pinterest (2025). Digital Services Act Transparency Report. July–December 2024. Pinterest. Retrieved 22.10.2025, from https://policy.pinterest.com/en/digital-services-act-transparencyreport-jul-2024-dec-2024 20 Pl encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Counting without accountability? Snapchat (2024). European Union Transparency | Snapchat Transparency. January–June 2024. Snapchat. Retrieved 22.10.2025, from https://values.snap.com/privacy/transparency/ european-union TikTok (2024). TikTok’s DSA Transparency report. January–June 2024. TikTok. Retrieved 22.10.2025, from https://sf16-va.tiktokcdn.com/obj/eden-va2/zayvwlY_fjulyhwzuhy[/ ljhwZthlaukjlkulzlp/DSA_H2_2024/TikTok-DSA-Transparency-Report-Jan-to-Jun-2024.pdf TikTok (2025). TikTok’s DSA Transparency report. July–December 2024. TikTok. Retrieved 22.10.2025, from https://sf16-va.tiktokcdn.com/obj/eden-va2/zayvwlY_fjulyhwzuhy[/ ljhwZthlaukjlkulzlp/DSA_H2_2024/Corrected%20Data/TikTok%20-%20DSA%20 Transparency%20report%20-%20July%20-%20December%202024%20-21.03.2025.pdf X (2024). DSA Transparency Report. April–September 2024. X. Retrieved 22.10.2025, from https://transparency.x.com/dsa-transparency-report.html X (2025). DSA Transparency Report. October 2024–March 2025. X. Retrieved 22.10.2025, from https://transparency.x.com/assets/dsa/transparency-report/dsa-transparency-reportapril-2025.pdf Pl 21 encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Debunking assumptions about disinformation READ FULL ARTICLE Disinformation has become one of the buzzwords of our time. The term appears so frequently in headlines and political warnings that it seems to be thoroughly understood. Given the amount of attention it receives, it is easy to assume that we already grasp the phenomenon. But do we? Reliable evidence remains quite limited. In this article, AnnKathrin Watolla uses a recent review to challenge three common assumptions about disinformation, examining what we do and don’t know. ANN-KATHRIN WATOLLA Debunking assumptions about disinformation : Rethinking what we think we know Pl Pl 22 encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Beyond Big Tech: National strategies for platform alternatives Pl READ FULL ARTICLE Global platforms such as Google, Amazon and YouTube have become an essential part of digital infrastructure supporting the internet as we know it. However, their dominance raises concerns about dependencies and lock-in effects. While regulation has long been the main response, some states have opted for a more proactive path: they’ve built their own platform alternatives in order to gain control over critical digital services and data. In this article, Alina Kontareva analyses the motivations behind these strategies in China, Russia and India. What lessons could Europe learn from this as it seeks to shape its own digital environment? ALINA KONTAREvA Beyond Big Tech: National strategies for platform alternatives Pl 23 encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Inside content moderation Pl READ FULL ARTICLE Content moderation relies on platform rules, technical systems and legal requirements, yet its consequences reach far beyond removing harmful posts. The division of labour between automated systems and human moderators has repeatedly reached its limits. Much of this work is outsourced to countries such as the Philippines or Kenya, where people review distressing content under precarious conditions. The authors of this article examine how these practices and guidelines shaped in the Global North reproduce or even amplify inequalities – for instance along lines of gender, origin or ethnicity. MAURICE STENZEL, KATHARINAMOSENE & FREDERIK EFFERENN Inside content moderation : Humans, machines and invisible work Pl 24 encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE Content moderation on digital platforms: Beyond states and firms Pl EXPLORE SPECIAL ISSUE New regulatory efforts in Europe and recent shifts in platform policy – such as Meta’s decision to end fact-checking partnerships – highlight the growing influence of non-state actors in shaping digital governance. However, how fair, inclusive and effective is their role in content regulation? This special issue, edited by Romain Badouard and Anne Bellon, brings together twelve contributions that trace the diverse roles of civil society actors. These range from NGOs and journalists to designers and researchers, and unfold across a variety of institutional and symbolic contexts. INTERNET POLICY REvIEW·SPECIAL ISSUE Content moderation on digital platforms: Beyond states and firms Pl 25 encore 2025/2026 PLATFORM GOvERNANCE What does the Digital Services Act actually do? START FOLDING The Digital Services Act (DSA), created by the European Union, is the first uniform legal framework of its kind to create a safer and more transparent online environment. Print out this easy-to-read mini magazine by Ann-Kathrin Watolla and Jella Ohnesorge and delve into a straightforward introduction to the obligations the regulation imposes on digital platforms. What steps can be taken to ensure that fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression and non-discrimination, are better protected? ZINE ON PLATFORM REGULATION What does the Digital Services Act actually do? Pl 32 encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked AI A seemingly innocent holiday photo becomes the template for a highly realistic nude image – generated by artificial intelligence (AI), circulated online, without the subject’s knowledge or consent. What sounds like science fiction is already a disturbing reality: tens of thousands of so-called deepfake pornographic images are created daily using freely accessible AI tools. These are computer-generated images or videos that simulate nudity or sexual acts. Women are disproportionately affected. This is no coincidence: sexualised violence is deeply rooted in society and digital technologies are significantly amplifying this reality. This article explores how deepfake pornography digitally perpetuates existing structures of violence – and what must be done to offer better protection for those affected. KATHARINA MOSENE Unwillingly naked : How deepfake pornography intensifies sexualised violence against women 33 AI encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked Deepfake pornography is not an isolated phenomenon. It is a particularly insidious form of image-based sexual violence (bff, 2024). This refers to digital assaults that use visual material to humiliate individuals or violate their sexual autonomy. Examples include upskirting (Polizei NordrheinWestfalen, 2021) – secretly photographing under skirts – and the nonconsensual distribution of intimate images, often euphemistically referred to as “revenge porn” (Frauen gegen Gewalt e.V., 2025), or as in this case, the dissemination of fake, AI-generated depictions of nudity or intimacy. These images are frequently distributed anonymously via messaging services, imageboards (Wikipedia, 2025) or pornographic platforms. Anyone can fall victim to deepfake pornography. The psychological toll these attacks take becomes evident in the voices of survivors. Danielle Citron, legal scholar and professor at the University of Maryland, describes deepfakes as an “invasion of sexual privacy”. In an interview with Vice magazine, she quotes a survivor saying: “Yes, it isn’t your actual vagina, but […] others think that they are seeing you naked.” Citron continues: “As a deepfake victim said to me – it felt like thousands saw her naked. She felt her body wasn’t her own anymore” (Cole, S., 2019). A CLICK AWAY FROM HARM: THE EASE OF CREATING DEEPFAKES But how are such deepfakes created—and who is behind them? What once required technical expertise, time and powerful computers is now (perhaps too) easily within reach. Deepfake images and videos can be generated using a smartphone and a single social media photo. So-called nudifier apps 34 AI encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked and browser-based services openly offer their tools online: users upload any image and, within seconds, the person pictured appears undressed (Cole, S., 2019). The first results are often free, followed by an offer for paid subscription. These are far from isolated cases. An investigation by netzpolitik.org revealed a wide range of providers generating thousands of such images daily. The business is booming. A study by 404 Media further illustrates the scale: Numerous AI-powered video generators – particularly from Chinese companies – offer minimal safeguards against the production of nonconsensual pornographic content (Maiberg, E. 2025). These tools are already being used en masse to create disturbingly realistic sexualised deepfake videos, using nothing more than a portrait photo. Once uploaded, these videos circulate in dedicated online communities and are nearly impossible to remove. FROM TAYLOR SWIFT TO SCHOOLGIRLS: A SHIFTING TARGET GROUP What makes the issue especially concerning is that most deepfakes feature bodies read as female. One reason lies in the training data behind the systems: many AI models were trained on millions of images of naked women. The result is a structurally biased technology that doesn’t merely replicate gender-based violence – it amplifies it. What emerges is a deeply gendered, automated form of digital violence – primarily targeting women (SecurityHero, 2023). 35 AI encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked Initially, it was public figures who were targeted: actresses, influencers, female politicians (Ajder, H. et al., 2019). But as the tools became more accessible, the target group shifted. Today, it is often girls and women from users’ immediate social environments who are affected: classmates, colleagues, neighbours. In Spain, for example, AI-generated nude images of schoolgirls circulated in messaging groups caused a scandal already in 2023 (Köver, C., 2023). In Pennsylvania, a teenager was arrested the following year for creating deepfake nudes of his female classmates (Der Standard, 2024). The full extent of the harm remains largely hidden. Reliable data are scarce. Many victims are not even aware that manipulated images of them are being circulated online. A SYSTEMIC FORM OF INTERSECTIONAL VIOLENCE This particular form of digital abuse is systemic. As legal scholar Danielle Citron accurately observes: “Deepfake technology is being weaponised against women by inserting their faces into porn. It is terrifying, embarrassing, demeaning, and silencing. Deepfake sex videos tell individuals their bodies are not their own – and can make it difficult to stay online, get or keep a job, and feel safe” (Ajder, H. et al., 2019). The targeted sexualised depiction of women’s – and increasingly queer – bodies is not a technical malfunction; it is an expression of patriarchal structures and is being deliberately used. This often occurs in the context 36 AI encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked of anti-feminist campaigns and incel movements, which aim to intimidate and exclude certain groups of people (Sittig, J., 2024). Studies show that over 95% of all deepfakes are sexual in nature. Almost 100% of these depict women. Marginalised groups are particularly affected: queer individuals, Black women and trans women (Paris, B. et al., (2019). This deliberate form of digital violence furthermore creates what is known as a silencing effect (NdM-Glossar, 2025): it distorts digital visibility and restricts democratic participation. DIGITAL VIOLENCE AS A BUSINESS MODEL What many still view as a niche phenomenon has become part of a lucrative market. Platforms offering deepfake services typically operate anonymously or from abroad. Access is easy: an email address suffices, payment is made by credit card, Google Pay or cryptocurrency (Meineck, S., 2024). A simple disclaimer (“no editing without consent”) is often the only nod to legality. Responsibility is shifted to users, while providers distance themselves from accountability. However, this very business model could offer a leverage point: The case of Pornhub demonstrates what economic pressure can achieve. In 2020, Visa and Mastercard cut ties with the platform over non-consensual content, prompting significant changes in its upload policies and age verification processes (Der Standard, 2022). A similar mechanism could be applied to deepfake platforms – such as mandatory withdrawal of support from 37 AI encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked payment providers, hosting services or search engines that enable their digital infrastructure (Kira, B., 2024). LEGAL GAPS AND POLITICAL MOMENTUM But economic pressure alone is not enough. Criminal law has so far struggled to keep pace with deepfake-related offences. Although German law includes provisions such as StGB, 1871, § 201a (violation of personal privacy) and the right to one’s own image (Bittner, C., 2021), many deepfake pornography cases fall through the cracks. Legal developments lag behind technological ones, perpetrators remain anonymous, and platforms operate outside EU jurisdiction. The German Women Lawyers’ Association (djb) has criticised these legal gaps and called for a dedicated, discrimination-sensitive criminal offence for the unauthorised creation and dissemination of sexualised deepfakes – independent of traditional pornography legislation (Deutscher Juristinnenbund, 2023). There is also an urgent need for targeted training for police and the judiciary, as well as the establishment of a network of specialised prosecutors to raise awareness and develop effective solutions. EU REGULATION: A FIRST STEP, BUT NOT A CURE-ALL While national legislation lags behind, developments at the EU level are gaining momentum. The Digital Services Act (DSA) requires platforms to swiftly remove reported illegal content (DSA, Art. 16, 2022) – including deepfakes – where clearly unlawful. The European AI Act introduces transparency obligations (AI Act, Art. 50, 2024) that synthetically generated 38 AI encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked content must be labelled as such. And with the new EU directive to combat violence against women (European Parliament and Council, 2024), the non-consensual dissemination of sexualised deepfakes will, for the first time, be criminalised across Europe. Member States – including Germany – have until 2027 to incorporate these rules into national law. In parallel, Germany’s proposed Violence Support Act aims to improve access to legal advice and assistance for victims (Die Bundesregierung, 2025). DIGITAL SELF-DEFENCE AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY In addition to legal regulation, technical and societal prevention is essential. Tools like Glaze and Nightshade can, for example, alter images in such a way that they become unusable for AI systems – preventing original photos from being repurposed for training datasets or the generation of realistic deepfakes. Think of them as a digital cloak of invisibility against deepfake abuse. At the same time, public awareness must shift. Image-based sexual violence is still trivialised. Victims are subjected to victim blaming (Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2025) rather than support. Yet this is not just about individual fates – it is about structural inequalities that are reproduced and exacerbated in the digital realm. 39 AI encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked A COMPLEX PROBLEM DEMANDS MULTIFACETED SOLUTIONS Sexualised deepfakes are more than technical manipulation. They reflect a shift in digital power dynamics – where existing inequalities are not only reproduced but intensified. The deliberate violation of intimacy and control disproportionately affects those who are already structurally disadvantaged. Deepfakes affect us all – but not equally. That’s why we need collective responses that are not merely technical, but feminist, human rights-based and rooted in solidarity. Digital violence is not a fringe issue of internet culture. It is its litmus test. Organisations like HateAid, the bff – Frauen gegen Gewalt e.V. and anna nackt are already taking action against non-consensual sexualised deepfakes. They support victims, offer contact points, and in 2023 jointlysubmitted a petition to German Digital Minister Volker Wissing, calling for stronger protections and clearer legal frameworks (HateAid, 2023). 40 AI encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked REFERENCES Ajder, H., Patrini, G., Cavalli, F., & Cullen, L.(2019): The State of Deepfakes: Landscape, Threats, and Impact. Deeptrace. https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/10/08/deepfake_report.pdf Bittner, C. (2021): (Fast) keine Fotos ohne Datenschutz. Stiftung Datenschutz. https:// stiftungdatenschutz.org/ehrenamt/praxisratgeber/praxisratgeber-detailseite/fotos-unddatenschutz-275 Bundesministerium der Justiz (Hrsg.) (1871). Strafgesetzbuch (StGB). https://www.gesetzeim-internet.de/stgb/ Cole, S. (2019): This Horrifying App Undresses a Photo of Any Woman With a Single Click. Vice. https://www.vice.com/en/article/deepnude-app-creates-fake-nudes-of-any-woman/ Deutscher Juristinnenbund (2023): Bekämpfung bildbasierter sexualisierter Gewalt. Policy Paper, 17. https://www.djb.de/presse/stellungnahmen/detail/st23-17 Der Standard (2024). Skandal um KI-Nacktbilder legt US-Schule lahm. Der Standard. https://www.derstandard.de/story/3000000245632/skandal-um-ki-nacktbilder-legt-usschule-lahm Der Standard (2022). Nach vorwürfen: visa und Mastercard sperren Zahlung von Pornhub-Werbung (2022). Der Standard. https://www.derstandard.de/story/2000138125747/ nach-vorwuerfen-visa-und-mastercard-sperren-zahlung-von-pornhub-werbung Die Bundesregierung (2025). Bessere Unterstützung für Gewaltopfer. Die Bundesregierung. https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/service/archiv-bundesregierung/ gewalthilfegesetz-2321756 European Commission (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on artificial intelligence and amending certain Union legislative acts (AI Act), Art. 50. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj 41 AI encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY Unwillingly naked European Commission (2022). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market for Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act), Art. 16. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/ reg/2022/2065/oj European Commission (2016). Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj European Parliament and Council (2024). Directive (EU) 2024/1385 of 14 May 2024 on combating violence against women and domestic violence. Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/DE/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202401385 Frauen gegen Gewalt e.V. (2025). Hinweise für die Berichterstattung über Gewalt gegen Frauen und Kinder. Bundesverband Frauenberatungsstellen und Frauennotrufe – Frauen gegen Gewalt (bff). https://www.frauen-gegen-gewalt.de/de/ueber-uns/presse/ informationen-fuer-die-presse/hinweise-fuer-die-berichterstattung-ueber-gewalt-gegenfrauen-und-kinder.html Frauen gegen Gewalt e.V. (2024). bff fordert: Bildbasierte Gewalt umfassend bekämpfen. Bundesverband Frauenberatungsstellen und Frauennotrufe – Frauen gegen Gewalt (bff). https://www.frauen-gegen-gewalt.de/de/aktuelles/nachrichten/nachricht/pressemitteilungbff-fordert-bildbasierte-gewalt-umfassend-bekaempfen-2.html Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (2025). victim Blaming. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. https://www.fes. de/wissen/gender-glossar/victim-blaming Hate Aid (2023): Deepfake-Pornos: Betroffene konfrontieren Wissing. Hate Aid gGmbH. https://hateaid.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Pressemitteilung-Schutz-vor-DeepfakePornos.pdf Kira, B. (2024): Deepfakes, the Weaponisation of AI Against Women and Possible Solutions. Verfassungsblog. https://doi.org/10.59704/9987d92e2c183c7f AI 48 encore 2025/2026 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOCIETY The Realities of Autonomous Weapons EXPLORE VOLUME As governments and militaries increase investment in artificial intelligence for defence, questions of accountability, human oversight and the boundaries of machine autonomy become ever more urgent. The way we frame and understand these systems is deeply intertwined with cultural imaginaries, legal norms and political decision-making. This anthology, edited by Thomas Christian Bächle and Jascha Bareis, explores how these realities shape and themselves become shaped by popular culture, regulatory and ethics debates, military doctrines, policies and research. ANTHOLOGY The Realities of Autonomous Weapons AI IMPACT SPOTLIGHT 2025 The impact of research often becomes apparent years after publication. This has certainly been the case with our AI Compass card game. To date, almost 10,000 copies have been requested by schools, universities and institutions across Germany. Educators have welcomed the game and incorporated it into their activities. For example, the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung in Lower Saxony has created a special edition to go along with a four-hour workshop concept. These workshops are led by trained student facilitators and offered to schools free of charge. Pupils use the AI Compass as a fun introduction to acquire new knowledge and develop reflective competencies, thereby supporting a better understanding of the societal and sustainability implications of AI. Due to high demand, the workshop concept is slated to be published next year as an Open Educational Resource, enabling teachers and project teams across Germany to use it in their own classrooms. We foster critical AI literacy in the classroom by giving teachers a ready-to-use method for their lessons in the form of an entertaining card game and workshop. Science in times of polarised public issues Sc JEANETTE HOFMANN INTERvIEWED BY TERESA vÖLKER Populism, platforms and the challenges of science communication FURTHER ARTICLES Misinformation and scientific expertise in talk shows When scientists are targeted, what helps? Identifying bias, taking responsibility : Critical perspectives on AI and data quality in higher education Digital by design, not by default: Resilience in higher education BEYOND Spotlight: Strengthening democracy against polarisation Blueprint: Rethinking scholarly publishing AI Artificial intelligence and society Wo Digital organising and the future of work FOCUS VISIT TOPIC OVERVIEW ONLINE Science in times of polarised public issues The digital society is putting ever more pressure on the creation, sharing and evaluation of scientific knowledge. Universities and research organisations are facing budget cuts and rising public scrutiny, while digital platforms amplify misinformation and accelerate backlash against scholars. These pressures are jeopardising scientific expertise’s credibility and ability to inform public discourse, and indeed shaping the conditions under which researchers must engage with society. Sustaining public trust in science is crucial, not only for informed democratic debate – but also for the functioning of democratic decision-making. Our research examines how the challenges to science communication are evolving, particularly in areas of research that become the focus of highly polarised debates. What responsibilities and demands do researchers face when engaging with the general public as well as interest-driven political and economic actors on such contested issues? 53 encore 2025/2026 SCIENCE IN TIMES OF POLARISED PUBLIC ISSUES Populism, platforms and the challenges of science communication Sc JEANETTE HOFMANN INTERvIEWED BY TERESA vÖLKER Populism, platforms and the challenges of science communication For the blog journal Elephant in the Lab, Teresa Völker interviewed Jeanette Hofmann about the role of science communication in fragmented publics and the impact of social media on democratic discourse. The conversation also addressed whether researchers can curb the spread of disinformation by engaging differently on social media, or whether these platforms are ultimately unsuitable for meaningful knowledge exchange. So, what constitutes effective communication in today’s hybrid media landscape? 54 Sc encore 2025/2026 SCIENCE IN TIMES OF POLARISED PUBLIC ISSUES Populism, platforms and the challenges of science communication What is disinformation and how does the spread of disinformation affect liberal democracies worldwide? I notice, the longer I work on this topic, that “disinformation” is really an umbrella term – in the sense that it covers many different phenomena, each of which may have its own logic, but they are all grouped under the same label. I find this relevant because I’m particularly interested in a type of disinformation that doesn’t appear in most definitions. Take, for example, Michael Hameleer’s definition, which describes disinformation as a form of manipulative communication whose underlying intention is often concealed. There’s an assumption behind this view that someone is strategically spreading falsehoods in such a way that the audience believes they are receiving accurate information. This conventional understanding of disinformation is often tied to platforms and algorithms. The assumption is that the attention economy and its algorithms help amplify disinformation. But this definition seems to overlook the kind of disinformation we now frequently see – namely that of political elites. With populist politicians you get the impression they simply don’t care about the difference between true and false – at least in the realm of political communication. In other areas, the accuracy of information still matters, say if it will rain tomorrow or if the flight is on time, but politically, accuracy and reliability of information seems to no longer matter. Disinformation is spread with the expectation that people will support certain claims, regardless of whether they believe them or not. It becomes a tool of power: populist politicians act as though they have the authority to define reality. 55 Sc encore 2025/2026 SCIENCE IN TIMES OF POLARISED PUBLIC ISSUES Populism, platforms and the challenges of science communication This kind of disinformation is not hidden, and platforms aren’t the primary vectors. It’s typically propagated by media outlets like Fox News or other right-wing channels, which bring it to the forefront, only to be taken up and debated by other media. Platforms like X (formerly Twitter) don’t necessarily offer the reach needed for such visibility; it is the interaction between fringe media and legacy mass media that amplify these messages to the public. What has changed in the era of social media? To be honest, this dynamic has always existed to some extent. What made it explode as a topic was 2016 – with Brexit and the US election. After these unexpected results, many observers sought explanations and blamed the outcome of these votes on platforms, arguing they had spread too much disinformation – and that voters, like “gullible sheep”, fell for it and made the wrong choices. That’s how the narrative unfolded. Since then, research and publications on disinformation have increased dramatically. A new research field developed that draws direct connections between disinformation and platforms. That’s one level of the discourse. Then there’s also a methodological dimension: when it comes to tracing disinformation, platforms are much easier to study than traditional media ecosystems, where drawing connections is much more complex. If you ask me what empirical role platforms play in spreading disinformation, I’d say they serve as a prelude to populist dynamics. A huge amount of content circulates online, and existing social networks help rumors and 56 Sc encore 2025/2026 SCIENCE IN TIMES OF POLARISED PUBLIC ISSUES Populism, platforms and the challenges of science communication bizarre narratives to spread. So yes, platforms enable a diversity of circulation paths for information. But we can’t say disinformation wouldn’t exist or would be less visible without platforms. It just would spread differently. Given that platforms depend on who uses them, do you think scientists and science communicators can help counter the spread of disinformation by engaging differently on social media? Or are these platforms ultimately unsuitable for sharing knowledge? No, I wouldn’t at all say they are unsuitable. Platforms accommodate so many different uses and opinions. That’s why many people, especially communication scholars, talk today about a “fragmentation of the public sphere”. At the very least, we can observe a kind of differentiation – we now have various coexisting cultural and thematic public spheres. I believe platforms and messaging services are indispensable for science and science communication. Depending on your field, they can be the fastest and most efficient means of communication with colleagues. For many disciplines, they’re also an irreplaceable source of information – providing insights that you wouldn’t get otherwise. Especially platforms that allow for curating your own feeds and choose which people to follow, create an immense value for its members. At the same time, we’re seeing a withdrawal of many scientific organisations and individual researchers from X (formerly Twitter). There is or used to be the widespread belief that democracy functions best when we all read, hear and discuss roughly the same information. But we also have to 57 Sc encore 2025/2026 SCIENCE IN TIMES OF POLARISED PUBLIC ISSUES Populism, platforms and the challenges of science communication recognise that this kind of homogeneous public sphere only existed for a relatively short time – essentially from the postwar period to the late 1990s. Back then, we had dominant mass media that told relatively unified stories about the world. But if you traveled to another country, you’d immediately notice that entirely different topics and regions dominated the local media coverage. For instance, while Africa might barely appear in German media, it is much more prominent in the UK or France. This example shows how strong the agenda-setting role of legacy media once was – a degree of selectivity that we no longer experience in the same way today. And that’s not necessarily bad; it simply defines a different media era. The real challenge now is: how do we create shared political understanding when everyone sees a different version of reality on their screens? That’s the key democratic question in the age of digital platforms. What does effective communication look like in today’s hybrid media environment? Many people are now working on new participatory formats, recognising that the model of democracy from the past 50 or 60 years may no longer be sufficient. One such idea is citizens’ assemblies, where randomly selected participants deliberate on complex policy issues. That’s one way to create public discourse – but these formats don’t scale easily. And they might not work for every issue, because solving complex problems requires expertise. Random selection alone doesn’t always ensure that. What we do see, though, is that when something truly dramatic happens – like the pandemic – we all talk about the same thing again. In moments like that, fragmentation Sc 64 encore 2025/2026 SCIENCE IN TIMES OF POLARISED PUBLIC ISSUES Digital by design, not by default: Resilience in higher education FREIA KUPER, BRONWEN DEACON & ANNA AUST Digital by design, not by default: Resilience in higher education READ FULL ARTICLE What does resilience in higher education really look like? And why does it emerge so differently across institutions? Five years after the pandemic, some universities are expanding digital strategies and hybrid models, while others remain committed to analogue-first teaching. By comparing a face-to-face programme in Germany with a digital-by-design Open University in Portugal, the authors of this article examine how resilience can be rooted in both stability and tradition or in flexibility and digital innovation. Sc EXPLORE BLUEPRINT RETHINKING SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING Diamond Open Access means publishing without paywalls for authors and readers. Our new blueprint shows how this non-profit, communitydriven model can strengthen fair, transparent and values-based scholarly publishing. This publication presents the findings of the ELADOAH research project and offers practical guidance for libraries, editors, institutions, funders and all those working toward a more equitable open science ecosystem. Sc 66 encore 2025/2026 SCIENCE IN TIMES OF POLARISED PUBLIC ISSUES Strengthening democracy against polarisation SPOTLIGHT ON CURRENT ISSUES Strengthening democracy against polarisation WATCH FULL DISCUSSION What is driving people further apart? The German election in February 2025 has reignited the debate about whether society is becoming increasingly polarised. Many young voters, in particular, have gravitated towards the political right or left. While democracy thrives on diverse opinions, at what point does ideological polarisation become problematic? In March, we explored these pressing questions in a new edition of our HIIG Spotlight, joined by experts Wander Jager and Stefano Braghiroli. Sc IMPACT SPOTLIGHT 2025 The KAPAZ project examines the phenomenon of hostility towards science, building the capacity to protect researchers and support research organisations. A key component of this has been the delivery of one-day, practice-oriented train-the-trainer workshops for communication professionals. Participants were guided in setting up support structures and implementing tried-and-tested strategies within their institutions to respond effectively to hostile or polarised public encounters. They are now implementing these strategies in their own institutions, translating research-based insights into practical action. The high demand for further sessions, including requests from organisations such as the German Society for Empirical Cultural Studies and the University of Applied Sciences for Police and Public Administration, demonstrates the urgent need for these skills. We strengthen the resilience of research organisations by training communication professionals to support researchers and implement strategies for handling hostility towards science. BEYOND Digitaler Salon: Rausreguliert? Micro-credentials on AI and data FURTHER ARTICLES Polished yet impersonal : The unintended consequences of writing your emails with AI AI at the microphone: The voice of the future? Emotionless competition at work: When trust in artificial intelligence falters SONJA KÖHNE Who hired this bot? On the ambivalence of using generative AI in recruiting Wo Digital organising and the future of work Su Digitalisation and sustainability Sc Science communication in times of polarised public issues FOCUS VISIT TOPIC OVERVIEW ONLINE The dynamic interplay of digitalisation and artificial intelligence (AI) is about to fundamentally reshape the workplace landscape. While there is a consensus that this shift is happening, the precise contours of the impending transformation remain unclear. How exactly will digital organising, digitalisation and AI in the workplace change our day-to-day professional life? In our research, we explore and explain these phenomena, assessing their impacts as well as the associated opportunities and risks for the future of work. Digital organising and the future of work 71 encore 2025/2026 DIGITAL ORGANISING AND THE FUTURE OF WORK Who hired this bot? Wo Generative artificial intelligence is advancing into ever more areas of organisational life, and HR practices – particularly hiring processes – are no exception. While AI recruiting technology has long been tied to hopes of freeing up resources for relational work, some evidence points to the contrary. As both recruiters and candidates lean into AI assistance, something essential risks being left behind: the human connection that recruiting depends on. This article is based on research conducted as part of our project: Generative AI in the workplace. It explores how GenAI is reshaping recruitment and why we must pause to ask not just what we can optimise, but why we are optimising in the first place. SONJA KÖHNE Who hired this bot? On the ambivalence of using generative AI in recruiting 72 Wo encore 2025/2026 DIGITAL ORGANISING AND THE FUTURE OF WORK Who hired this bot? “When I prepared this guide for my […] interview […], I ended up with […] a great competency-based interview guide, with behavioural anchors and all sorts of things. And I almost forgot to ask [the candidate]: ‘What is actually important to you when looking for a new employer?’ […] because the AI didn’t generate these questions for me.” —— from an interview with a recruiting manager, 2025 In many areas in and around the workplace, people are currently experimenting with ways of integrating generative AI tools like ChatGPT into their routines and workflows (Dell’Acqua et al., 2023; Retkowsky et al., 2024). The goal is often quite simple: to improve personal effectiveness and save time. For example, few job seekers enjoy writing lengthy cover letters for dozens of applications. In a similar way, few recruiters enjoy scanning dozens of those applications. In comes generative AI, promising both parties support throughout the process. This can lead to significant shifts to a procedure meant to help job seekers and employers evaluate whether or not they will be a good fit for each other – a meaningful task for both (Hunkenschroer & Kriebitz, 2022). It also raises new questions: Do recruiters or hiring managers want to read generic AI-written cover letters? Do job seekers want their applications to be screened by AI? The answer to both may be no. Yet, as generative AI further advances into hiring practices, we are left to ask: What exactly are we optimising for? And at what cost? 73 Wo encore 2025/2026 DIGITAL ORGANISING AND THE FUTURE OF WORK Who hired this bot? THE RISE OF GENERATIVE AI IN RECRUITING To understand these shifts, it helps to distinguish between the types of AI typically used in people management. Although the line is blurry, scholars often differentiate between discriminative and generative AI. Discriminative AI systems make predictions and classifications, while generative AI systems produce seemingly new content (Feuerriegel et al., 2023; Jebara, 2004). In the context of people management, discriminative AI helps organisations make better personnel decisions (e.g. by predicting candidate-job fit), and generative AI can help to create more effective HRrelated content (e.g. images or texts for job ads) (Andrieux et al., 2024). Generative AI qualitatively differs from discriminative AI because it can, among other things, be applied to a broad array of tasks. Thanks to tools like ChatGPT, it is also easily accessible to many (Krakowski, 2025). In people management in general and recruiting in particular, this opens up a wide range of applications (Budhwar et al., 2023; Chowdhury et al., 2024). THE ALLURE OF AUTOMATION The introduction of new technology comes with high hopes and (sometimes broken) promises (Garvey, 2018). In the workplace, such promises are often related to automating repetitive tasks to free up resources for more meaningful work. In the case of people management, hopes are often about reducing administrative tasks to free up time for relational or strategic work. For example, if recruiters can use AI to screen resumes more efficiently, they can spend more time on personal interactions with candidates. In interviews Wo 80 encore 2025/2026 DIGITAL ORGANISING AND THE FUTURE OF WORK AI at the microphone: The voice of the future? READ FULL ARTICLE The audio industry is in flux. Podcasts, audiobooks and audio dramas are more popular than ever; meanwhile, artificial intelligence is transforming the production and distribution of this digital audio content. Voice synthesis tools can now automatically narrate texts and algorithms can generate entire podcast episodes. What new opportunities are emerging, and what challenges lie ahead? In this article, Philip Meier explores the most exciting trends and examines the present and future of AI in the audio world. PHILIP MEIER AI at the microphone: The voice of the future? Wo 81 encore 2025/2026 DIGITAL ORGANISING AND THE FUTURE OF WORK Emotionless competition at work: When trust in artificial intelligence falters READ FULL ARTICLE In many workplaces, humans already work side by side with artificial intelligence. Systems such as ChatGPT and DALL–E, as well as analytical tools, support decision-making processes, provide creative input and handle complex tasks – often more quickly and accurately than humans. However, this superiority has its downside. Research by Lorenz Graf-Vlachy shows that those who feel outperformed by AI begin to doubt not only their own abilities, but also the technology itself. Paradoxically, a machine’s strength can undermine trust in it. When introducing AI, what should companies keep in mind? LORENZ GRAF-vLACHY Emotionless competition at work: When trust in artificial intelligence falters Wo 82 encore 2025/2026 DIGITAL ORGANISING AND THE FUTURE OF WORK Rausreguliert? WATCH FULL TALK Start-ups are driving innovation with AI, but the EU’s new AI Act is set to change the rules of the game. How can small teams comply with the Act’s complex documentation and risk control requirements without compromising their creativity? In the May issue of our Digitaler Salon, we discussed whether the new regulation provides entrepreneurs with legal certainty or hinders innovation. DIGITALER SALON Rausreguliert? ENGLISH SUBTITLES AVAILABLE Wo 83 encore 2025/2026 DIGITAL ORGANISING AND THE FUTURE OF WORK Micro-credentials on AI and data ENROL IN COURSES Explore our new online courses! The first introduces you to the technical foundations of AI, encouraging you to think critically about its application in various contexts. The second course explains how data is produced, governed and negotiated. These two micro-credentials have been developed to prepare students from Bangladesh, India, and Vietnam without a technical background for the rapidly evolving demands of the digitalised work environment. STRENGTHENING DIGITAL SKILLS Micro-credentials on AI and data IMPACT SPOTLIGHT 2025 The Strengthening Digital Skills through Micro-Credentials project develops flexible courses to equip university students in Bangladesh, India and Vietnam with industry-aligned skills. The two training units, Decoding AI and Understanding Data, teach participants to grasp key concepts, critically assess technological systems and understand social and regulatory implications, including risks such as automation bias. In collaboration with the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) and partner universities, HIIG designed these micro-credentials to require no prior technical knowledge and to actively support female students’ participation in digital fields. The courses are already being adopted by partner universities in Asia and integrated into regular teaching. This demonstrates how research-based insights can be translated into practical skills that foster inclusive participation in the digital economy. We empower the next generation to thrive in the digital workplace by giving them a practical understanding of AI and data, as well as their societal and ethical implications. Wo Digital organising and the future of work Digitalisation and sustainability Su LENA WINTER & THERESA ZÜGER Blind spot sustainability : Making AI’s environmental impact measurable MAURICE STENZEL Escaping the digitalisation backlog : data governance puts cities and municipalities in the digital fast lane FURTHER ARTICLES The digital metabolic rift: Why do we live beyond our means online? Online echoes: the Tagesschau in Einfacher Sprache Opportunities to combat loneliness Impactful by design : A call for digital entrepreneurs driven to create positive societal impact BEYOND Data Governance Guide Digitaler Salon: Watt für’n Prompt FOCUS VISIT TOPIC OVERVIEW ONLINE Digitalisation and sustainability When it comes to sustainability, digitalisation opens up great opportunities but poses myriad challenges. It is important that societies, organisations and individuals begin to grasp the sustainable potential of digital technologies. Currently, their negative effects often outweigh the positive ones due to enormous requirements for material and energy, but also due to discrimination against certain social groups – the same ones affected most by the negative consequences of outsized material and energy consumption on the whole. In our research at HIIG, we investigate how digital and sustainable transformation can be shaped together. How can technology be introduced and used in a responsible manner – from a social, economic and ecological perspective? 88 encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Blind spot sustainability Su LENA WINTER & THERESA ZÜGER Blind spot sustainability : Making AI’s environmental impact measurable Efficient, smart and environmentally friendly? Artificial intelligence is often hailed as the solution to many of the major challenges we face today, including climate change. However, behind this optimistic vision of the future lies a blind spot: AI consumes vast quantities of energy, produces CO₂ emissions, and its environmental footprint remains largely opaque. However, reliable data, suitable measurement methods and binding standards are still lacking. In this article, Lena Winter and Theresa Züger explain what needs to change in order to assess the impact of AI. 89 Su encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Blind spot sustainability Every stage of an AI system’s life cycle demands vast resources: from hardware manufacturing and data centre construction to the development and training of AI models and their subsequent use. At the end of this chain lies heaps of outdated hardware e-waste. All of these steps require rare earths, energy and water, and must be included in AI sustainability assessments (Smith & Adams, 2024). It’s important to note that sustainability has many facets– ecological, social and economic. This blog post focuses on environmental protection – in other words, on the ecological dimension. It’s about how we can conserve resources and preserve nature. AI AND ECOLOGICAL SUSTAINABILITY – WHAT WE (DON’T) KNOW For a long time, AI was seen as a technological beacon for the green transition. Increasingly, however, its substantial environmental impact is being discussed in more critical terms. We highlighted how the public discourse around AI is shifting in Germany already in our Digital Society Blog (Liebig, 2024). Little is known about AI’s actual total resource consumption. Concrete data and figures remain scarce, often kept under wraps. Major AI providers and data centre operators – over a third of which are based in the US (Hajonides et al., 2025) – like Google or Meta, offer little transparency about their actual usage. As a result, AI’s ecological footprint can currently only be estimated rather than precisely measured (Smith & Adams, 2024). To make matters worse, we lack standardised methods to reliably assess AI’s 96 Su encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Blind spot sustainability REFERENCES Hajonides, J., McCarthy, J., Koulouri, K., & Camargo, R. (2025) Navigating AI´s Thirst in a Water-Scarce World. A Governance Agenda for AI and the Environment. NatureFinance. https://www.naturefinance.net/resources-tools/navigating-ais-thirst-in-a-water-scarce-world Kaack, L. H., Donti, P. L., Strubell, E., Kamiya, G., Creutzig, F., & Rolnick, D. (2022). Aligning artificial intelligence with climate change mitigation. Nature Climate Change, 12(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01377-7. Kühnlein, I., & Lübbert B. ( 2024). Ein kleiner Teil von vielen – KI für den Umweltschutz. Digital Society Blog. 10.5281/zenodo.13221001. Li, P., Yang, J., Islam, M. A., & Ren, S. (2023). Making AI Less „Thirsty“: Uncovering and Addressing the Secret Water Footprint of AI Models. arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2304.03271. Liebig, L. (2024). Zwischen vision und Realität: Diskurse über nachhaltige KI in Deutschland. Digital Society Blog. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14044890. Smith, H., & Adams, C. (2024). Thinking about using AI?. Here’s what you can and (probably) can’t change about its environmental impact. Greenweb Foundation. Retrieved 14.04.2024, from https://www.thegreenwebfoundation.org/publications/report-aienvironmental-impact Su 97 encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Human rights implications in Chinese smart cities READ FULL ARTICLE NELE BUSS The digital metabolic rift: Why do we live beyond our means online? Our digital habits leave a bigger carbon footprint than we think. Although clicks, streams and AI prompts may feel weightless, they consume real energy, water and resources. Invisible infrastructures make the environmental cost of digital consumption easy to ignore. So, while we recycle and avoid flying to protect the planet, our ecological awareness often ends where the digital begins. Nele Buß introduces the concept of a “digital metabolic rift” and explains how it can help us rethink the environmental impact of our digital activities. Su Su 98 encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Online echoes: the Tagesschau in Einfacher Sprache READ FULL ARTICLE ANNE-KATHRIN BERG & FREYA HEWETT Online echoes: the Tagesschau in Einfacher Sprache Simplified news isn’t simple at all. Since June 2024, the German Tagesschau has offered a simplified language edition of its news broadcast to improve its own accessibility. Right after its launch, the socalled Tagesschau in Einfacher Sprache sparked a heated online debate. AnneKathrin Berg and Freya Hewett analysed Reddit discussions to identify six recurring themes that shed light on how we negotiate participation in the public sphere. What can public broadcasters learn from this online echo? Su Su 99 encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Opportunities to combat loneliness READ FULL ARTICLE ANNIKA ULICH & THOMAS SCHILDHAUER Opportunities to combat loneliness : How care facilities are connecting neighborhoods Our society is getting older and loneliness is one of the biggest challenges of demographic change. As mobility declines and social spaces disappear, care facilities are reconsidering their role. Annika Ulich and Thomas Schildhauer demonstrate how they are evolving into open neighbourhood hubs that promote social and digital participation. These new hybrid meeting places offer digital skills training and community-focused services, aiming to strengthen community ties and forge meaningful connections across generations. Su Su 100 encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Impactful by design READ FULL ARTICLE PAUL vILCHEZ Impactful by design : A call for digital entrepreneurs driven to create positive societal impact Good intentions can still build bad technology. In this article, Paul Vilchez explains why digital solutions often fail when they ignore the lived realities of the local communities they target. Looking at a healthcare app developed for Ethiopia as an example, he demonstrates how participatory and value-sensitive design can create impactful tools that truly serve people. How can entrepreneurs embed societal values from the very first prototype? Su 102 encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Escaping the digitalisation backlog Su German cities and municipalities perform many functions that facilitate our daily lives: they organise traffic, manage schools and childcare centres, and provide social services. Many of these tasks could be improved and simplified by using digital solutions, such as user-friendly transport apps, digital public office services and data-based traffic planning to reduce congestion. However, for such digital solutions to realise their potential, data from different sources must be meaningfully brought together. In practice, this often entails considerable challenges. Projects that use data often fail in the planning phase and become part of the digitalisation backlog. We have investigated the reasons for this and developed a digital handbook based on our research: the Data Governance Guide. This handbook supports German administrations in implementing data-driven projects in a structured and legally compliant manner, ensuring that digital solutions are adopted and provide tangible benefits for citizens. MAURICE STENZEL Escaping the digitalisation backlog : data governance puts cities and municipalities in the digital fast lane 103 Su encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Escaping the digitalisation backlog WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF DATA GOVERNANCE? Imagine if local public transport adapted its timetable according to the number of passengers each day. It could then deploy larger vehicles or increase the frequency of services if demand increased. This is technically feasible, and the necessary data is available in principle. For a project like this to be implemented, however, many parties would need to work together. Transport companies would have to provide data on routes, vehicles and passenger flows, while the city would need to gather and forward data on the traffic situation. A technology provider would also need to develop the planning software. This cooperation must be designed so that all laws, particularly those relating to data protection, are complied with. This requires clear regulations: Who is allowed to process which data? How may it be used? How will it be protected, and how long may it be stored for? What requirements must the data meet so that administrations can use it to make decisions? This is where data governance comes in. It establishes rules for data processing, allocates responsibilities and organises the process. It also ensures that legal certainty is always guaranteed and that everyone involved ultimately benefits. Digital innovations should not just be technically possible, but indeed should also improve our lives. Although the goal and the rules are often clear, many digital projects are not getting off the ground. They are stuck in a digitalisation backlog. Why is that the case? 104 Su encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Escaping the digitalisation backlog WHY IS IMPLEMENTING DIGITAL SOLUTIONS IN CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES OFTEN SO DIFFICULT? There are many reasons why digitisation projects grind to a halt. The most important reason is that administrations, companies and citizens interpret the value of data differently depending on the use case. For some, it is an opportunity to do something useful; for others, it poses risks. For data to be used, the benefits must outweigh the risks. The problem with this is that the risks of data protection or the disclosure of business secrets are often immediately apparent when sharing data with third parties. The benefits, on the other hand, often only become apparent later – for example, when a flexible bus timetable has reliably increased passenger numbers. Another problem is that the required data is distributed across many different bodies, including administrations, companies, research institutions and, increasingly, the general public. As benefits and risks assessments change from case to case, and as laws and technology are constantly being adapted, flexible solutions are needed. Many existing data governance concepts are overly complicated and technical, and therefore do not work well in practice. For successful implementation, the parties involved need to harmonise three areas. Firstly, they must coordinate their processes when working together on a specific project. Secondly, they must ensure that digital solutions function smoothly. Thirdly, they must ensure that legal requirements are complied with. So far, there has been a lack of approaches that allow local employees to implement this independently. Solutions need to go beyond 105 Su encore 2025/2026 DIGITALISATION AND SUSTAINABILITY Escaping the digitalisation backlog one-off measures and be made available more broadly in more municipal administrations and communities, and, crucially, be uncomplicated. HOW THE DATA GOVERNANCE GUIDE CAN HELP We developed the Data Governance Guide as part of our Data & Smart City Governance project. This digital handbook is aimed directly at administrations, companies, politicians and citizens. It provides cities and municipalities with practical, three-step instructions for planning and implementing data projects in a comprehensible manner that takes legal requirements into account. The guide was developed with a practical focus and tested in various areas, including air quality management in Berlin and the digital strategy in Haßfurt. “Measures must be planned according to need. But when is a measure appropriate to the need? This is where the guide comes in. It enables local authorities to track processes and planned measures in a structured manner, record them clearly and highlight processes, actors, data and associated potential at key points.” — Thorsten Kempf, Chief Digital Officer model project Smart Green City Haßfurt The aim was to investigate how public administrations, companies and civil society could collaborate to use and process data to help achieve cleaner encore volume 2025/2026 Published December 2025 PUBLISHER Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society Französische Str. 9 10117 Berlin EDITORIAL TEAM Frederik Efferenn, Freia Kuper, KatharinaMosene, Björn Scheuermann, Larissa Wunderlich, Sarah Ziedler DESIGN Larissa Wunderlich DOI 10.5281/zenodo.17912843