Ash Center logo

Policy Brief  

Plural Publics

The authors highlight why we believe the problem of “plural publics” to be a core challenge of data governance, discuss existing tools that can help achieve it and a research agenda to further develop and integrate these tools.

By:

  • Divya Siddarth
  • Glen Weyl
  • Shrey Jain

Programs

Allen Lab: Technology & Democracy

Issues

Democracy and AI

Download the PDF

Plral Publics in white text on Teal background

Data governance is usually conceptualized in terms of “privacy” v. “publicity”. Yet a core feature of pluralistic societies is association, groups that share with each other, privately. These are a diversity of “publics”, each externally private but with the ability to coordinate and share internally. Empowering them requires tools that allow the establishment of shared communicative contexts and their defense against external sharing outside of context. The ease of spreading information online has challenged such “contextual integrity” and the rise of generative foundation models like GPT-4 may radically exacerbate this challenge. In the face of this challenge, we highlight why we believe the problem of “plural publics” to be a core challenge of data governance, discuss existing tools that can help achieve it and a research agenda to further develop and integrate these tools.

Related Resources

Q & A: Crocodile tears, Can the ethical-moral intelligence of AI models be trusted?
A hand pressing a tablet using AI.

Q+A

Q & A: Crocodile tears, Can the ethical-moral intelligence of AI models be trusted?

As artificial intelligence becomes more embedded in everyday decision-making, its role in shaping how people think about ethics and morality is drawing increasing scrutiny. In this conversation with researcher Sarah Hubbard, we discuss insights from her co-authored paper, “Crocodile Tears: Can the Ethical-Moral Intelligence of AI Models Be Trusted?”—examining how AI systems respond to moral dilemmas, and what this reveals about the risks, limitations, and need for greater transparency and human oversight in AI-driven ethical guidance.

Voter Experience Summit Recap

Commentary

Voter Experience Summit Recap

Allen Lab Fellow Hillary Lehr convened a Voter Experience Summit at Harvard’s Ash Center in March, bringing together 25 cross-sector experts to rigorously map the voter journey. This essay explores how that collaborative process could lay the groundwork for new interventions to understand and improve the experience of voting for all.

VIDEOS: After Neoliberalism From Left to Right

Additional Resource

VIDEOS: After Neoliberalism From Left to Right

After Neoliberalism: From Left to Right brought together hundreds of leading economists, political scientists, journalists, writers and thinkers from across the political spectrum to explore and debate emerging visions for the future of the political economy.

Panel videos below.

More on this Issue

AI models appear to recognize moral complexity — then ignore it, new study by researchers affiliated with Harvard Kennedy School’s Allen Lab finds
Outstretched hands holding a graphic of a scale and the outlines of two heads.

Media Release

AI models appear to recognize moral complexity — then ignore it, new study by researchers affiliated with Harvard Kennedy School’s Allen Lab finds

New study published in AI and Ethics introduces a new ethical-moral intelligence framework for AI and finds that leading AI models mimic human moral concern while making decisions that reveal a hidden value hierarchy. 

Artificial Intelligence and Democracy: Campaigns, Elections, Movements, and Deliberation
The U.S. Capitol with a digital grid overlay.

Article

Artificial Intelligence and Democracy: Campaigns, Elections, Movements, and Deliberation

A new chapter in APSA Preprints by Archon Fung, Winthrop Laflin McCormack Professor of Citizenship and Self-Government and Director of the Ash Center, Bailey Flanigan, former postdoctoral fellow at the Ash Center and co-authors explores how generative AI is reshaping four dimensions of democratic practice—political campaigns, election administration, social movements, and citizen deliberation. The authors argue that AI’s ultimate democratic impact will depend less on the technology itself, and more on how institutions and leaders implement and regulate it.

Q & A: Crocodile tears, Can the ethical-moral intelligence of AI models be trusted?
A hand pressing a tablet using AI.

Q+A

Q & A: Crocodile tears, Can the ethical-moral intelligence of AI models be trusted?

As artificial intelligence becomes more embedded in everyday decision-making, its role in shaping how people think about ethics and morality is drawing increasing scrutiny. In this conversation with researcher Sarah Hubbard, we discuss insights from her co-authored paper, “Crocodile Tears: Can the Ethical-Moral Intelligence of AI Models Be Trusted?”—examining how AI systems respond to moral dilemmas, and what this reveals about the risks, limitations, and need for greater transparency and human oversight in AI-driven ethical guidance.