Podcast
Public interest technologist Bruce Schneier joins Terms of Engagement hosts Archon Fung and Stephen Richer to discuss circumstances under which AI systems could defy doom and gloom scenarios and actually enhance democracy and civic engagement.
Optimism is in short supply these days in the backlash against AI systems and their potential effects on everything from the economy to the environment to society and democracy. But technologist and security expert Bruce Schneier believes that AI, if deployed in the public interest, can strengthen democracy and help citizens have a stronger voice in how they are governed.
Schneier, an author, blogger, and Harvard Kennedy School lecturer in public policy, joins Terms of Engagement hosts Archon Fung and Stephen Richer to discuss the risks and opportunities presented by AI systems, including ways to regulate them and recent proposals for the government to take a direct public ownership stake in the tech industry’s most powerful firms.
Coming soon!
Bruce Schneier is an internationally renowned security technologist and the author of over a dozen books, including his latest with co-author Nathan Sanders: “Rewiring Democracy: How AI Will Transform Our Politics, Government, and Citizenship.” Schneier is a lecturer in public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a fellow at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. He is also a board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and AccessNow; and an Advisory Board Member of the Electronic Privacy Information Center and VerifiedVoting.org.
His influential newsletter “Crypto-Gram” and his blog “Schneier on Security” are read by over 250,000 people. He has testified before Congress, has served on several government committees, and is regularly quoted in the news media.
Archon Fung is the Winthrop Laflin McCormack Professor of Citizenship and Self-Government at the Harvard Kennedy School and the Director of the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation. His research explores policies, practices, and institutional designs that deepen the quality of democratic governance with a focus on public participation, deliberation, and transparency. He has authored five books, four edited collections, and over fifty articles appearing in professional journals. He received two S.B.s — in philosophy and physics — and his Ph.D. in political science from MIT.
Stephen Richer is the former elected Maricopa County Recorder, responsible for voter registration, early voting administration, and public recordings in Maricopa County, Arizona, the fourth largest county in the United States. Prior to being an elected official, Stephen worked at several public policy think tanks and as a business transactions attorney. Stephen received his J.D. and M.A. from The University of Chicago and his B.A. from Tulane University. Stephen has been broadly recognized for his work in elections and American Democracy. In 2021, the Arizona Republic named Stephen “Arizonan of the Year.” In 2022, the Maricopa Bar Association awarded Stephen “Public Law Attorney of the Year.” In 2023, Stephen won “Leader of the Year” from the Arizona Capitol Times. And in 2024, Time Magazine named Stephen a “Defender of Democracy.”
The views expressed on this show are those of the hosts alone and do not necessarily represent the positions of the Ash Center or its affiliates.
Coming soon!
Podcast
Andrea Hailey, who leads Vote.org, one of the nation’s largest nonpartisan voter engagement platforms, joins hosts Archon Fung and Stephen Richer on Terms of Engagement to discuss trends, turnout, and trepidation as we head into the pivotal 2026 midterm elections.
Podcast
Oxford University Professor Pepper Culpepper joins Terms of Engagement hosts Archon Fung and Steven Richer to discuss corporate excess, bipartisan popular anger, and his new book “Billionaire Backlash: The Age of Corporate Scandal and How It Could Save Democracy.”
Podcast
Harvard Law School Professor Guy-Uriel Charles joins Terms of Engagement hosts Archon Fung and Stephen Richer to discuss the US Supreme Court’s decision to effectively dismantle the Voting Rights Act, its political aftermath, and what voting rights advocates can do to achieving electoral fairness in its wake.
