What does trust mean in the age of AI?

In this video interview, Professor Terry Flew explores the evolving concept of trust in the context of media, technology, and artificial intelligence. He highlights how AI challenges traditional notions of human-machine interaction, raising concerns about authenticity and reliability. Professor Flew discusses the shift from minimal government involvement in the internet to increased regulation due to monopolisation and social media harms. He emphasises the importance of governance frameworks, institutional oversight, and ethical considerations in AI development, including data bias and global capacity disparities. Ultimately, he calls for public-interest-driven regulation to ensure responsible technological advancement and trustworthy communication systems.

Transcript

“So the question of trust has had a long, if somewhat subterranean history in debates about society and media and communications literature has not for the most part dealt with the question of trust, yet this question of trust at a distance, it’s fundamentally around questions of how we communicate with one another and the technologies that we use for those purposes, as well as the institutions that we look for as guarantor of trust.

I think the biggest impact of AI is we are never quite sure whether we are dealing with a human or a machine. Think for instance, when you deal with a telco and you’re dealing with a bot or an airline or whatever it might be, it looks like humans have produced it or are doing it.

And this whole question of what is real and what is fake has taken on a whole new impetus in the last few years. In particular, as we deal with the morass of AI generated text and AI generated images. And the more complex these tasks become, the more difficult it is to simply rely on computer programs to get it right for at least two, possibly three decades.

There was largely a view that the role of government was to stay off the internet from about the mid 2010s. However, we see a growing backlash to that, particularly around concerns about harmful impacts to social media. In that respect, we also see a growing monopolisation of the tech sector. The few corporate giants largely displacing the open internet. And this has given us an environment where there’s a greater preparedness on the part of governments to engage more directly in policies related to the internet.

But of course, importantly here is the question of who oversees such frameworks. Do we rely on companies themselves in a self-regulatory model to do so? Well, there’s a lot more doubt about that now, I would say, particularly in light of how we’ve seen social media evolve over a 20 to 30 year period, a technology is never simply a thing or a device or an artefact. It comes packaged with ways of thinking about that technology.

We’ve been talking about things that we now understand to be artificial intelligence for almost two centuries. Yet the technologies that enable this are only really starting to emerge in a serious way. Now, we are not simply relying on technologies to carry human communication, but the technologies are themselves communicators in their own right.

We have interests or if you like, the materiality of the technologies, who is developing, what sort of data are they using, what sort of biases are there in that data? Is there evidence of discrimination through it? What about the global distribution of capacity to do this?

And finally, the institutions, what will be the governance frameworks and regulatory organisations that will have oversight of this? What do we expect them to do? How will we, be sure that they act in the public interest?”

Share this article

Related Articles

Killing the chicken to scare the monkey: the curious progressive urge to take down Australia’s social media minimum age rules

Evidence from Australia after three months of the Online Safety (Social Media Minimum Age Amendment) Act is that outcomes have been ambiguous. A Compliance Update Report released by the Office of the eSafety Commissioner in March 2026 found that while almost half of surveyed parents had at least one child with their own social media account prior to the restrictions coming into effect, this proportion had decreased to nearly one third following implementation of the ban. Notably, of the parents who reported their child had an account on each platform prior to 10 December 2025, around 7 in 10 reported that their child still had an account, with only 3 in 10 reporting that their child no longer had an account.

Why we are not in a post-truth era

Discussions about trust have characteristically tied the concept closely to that of truth. When we are asked why we consider a particular person trustworthy, the question of whether they tell the truth is likely to feature highly. As the great physicist and Nobel Prize winner Albert Einstein observed, ‘Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters’.

To age-gate or not to age-gate? The Australian Social Media Minimum Age legislation and its international impact

When Australia implemented the world’s first legislated social media minimum age  restrictions on 10 December 2025, it attracted significant global attention. The Australian Science Media Centre recorded that the 52 academics registered as experts on the subject were sourced in over 2600 news items worldwide in December 2025 alone. It was extensively covered by virtually every major international news outlet, and I did interviews with BBC, CNN, Al-Jazeera, The Times, Asahi Shimbun and many others.  

Time for Trust: Can we trust Hollywood?

In this episode, Associate Professor Bruce Isaacs dives into the crisis of trust in images – from Hollywood to Instagram – and explains why we may no longer know what’s real. It’s a timely, provocative discussion about how cinema, digital media and AI are reshaping our relationship to truth itself.