Yapay Zekâ Destekli Medya Ekosisteminde Açık Kaynak İstihbaratının Bilişsel Güvenlik Rolü

Abstract

Bu çalışma, yapay zekâ destekli medya ekosisteminin bilişsel güvenlik üzerindeki etkilerini açık kaynak istihbaratı (OSINT) perspektifinden incelemektedir. Günümüzde üretken yapay zekâ teknolojileri bilgi üretim süreçlerini hızlandırmakta ve manipülatif anlatıların daha ikna edici biçimde dolaşıma girmesine imkân tanımaktadır. Algoritmik öneri sistemleri içerik görünürlüğünü belirlemekte ve bireylerin maruz kaldığı bilgi evrenini kişiselleştirmektedir. Bu durum ortak gerçeklik alanını daraltarak algı manipülasyonu zeminini güçlendirmektedir. Çalışma, güvenliğin klasik fiziksel tehdit merkezli çerçeveden bilişsel güvenlik odaklı bir yaklaşıma doğru genişlediğini tartışmaktadır. Bu kapsamda OSINT’in sadece veri toplama ve doğrulama faaliyeti olmadığı, aynı zamanda söylem, anlatı ve etki ağlarını analiz eden bir anlam çözümleme kapasitesi geliştirmesi gerektiği savunulmaktadır. Araştırma, tematik analiz yöntemiyle akademik literatürü ve NATO, NIST ve ABD İstihbarat Topluluğu tarafından yayımlanan politika belgelerini değerlendirmektedir. Yapay zekâ kaynaklı tehditler epistemik kırılganlıklar bağlamında sistematik biçimde sınıflandırılmaktadır. Son olarak çalışma, OSINT’in bilişsel erken uyarı kapasitesi olarak yeniden yapılandırılmasını öngören “Bilişsel Güvenlik Odaklı OSINT Dayanıklılık Döngüsü” modelini önermektedir.

Keywords

• Güvenlik Çalışmaları
• Açık Kaynak İstihbaratı
• Bilişsel Güvenlik
• Algı Yönetimi
• Sentetik Medya

The Cognitive Security Role of Open Source Intelligence in the Artificial Intelligence-Supported Media Ecosystem

Abstract

This study examines the effects of the AI-driven media ecosystem on cognitive security from an open source intelligence (OSINT) perspective. Today, generative artificial intelligence technologies accelerate information production processes and enable manipulative narratives to circulate in more persuasive forms. Algorithmic recommendation systems determine content visibility and personalize the information environment to which individuals are exposed. This situation narrows the shared reality space and strengthens the ground for perception manipulation. The study discusses that security is expanding from a classical framework centered on physical threats toward a cognitive security oriented approach. In this context, it is argued that OSINT is not merely an activity of data collection and verification, but also needs to develop a meaning-making capacity that analyzes discourse, narratives, and networks of influence. The research evaluates academic literature and policy documents published by NATO, NIST, and the U.S. Intelligence Community through a thematic analysis method. AI-driven threats are systematically classified within the context of epistemic vulnerabilities. Finally, the study proposes the “Cognitive Security-Oriented OSINT Resilience Cycle” model, which envisages restructuring OSINT as a cognitive early warning capacity.

Keywords

• Security Studies
• Open Source Intelligence
• Cognitive Security
• Perception Management
• Synthetic Media

References

1. Ali, S., Abuhmed, T., El-Sappagh, S., Muhammad, K., Alonso-Moral, J. M., Confalonieri, R.,... & Herrera, F. (2023). Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): What we know and what is left to attain Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence. Information fusion, 99, 101805.
2. Arslan, AC (2025). Yeni Güvenlik Konsepti Bağlamında Dezenformasyonla Mücadele. Iğdır Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (38), 361-373.
3. Ayhan, U. (2006). Metropoliten alanlarda güvenlik sorunu ve çözüm önerileri. Gazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kamu Yönetimi Anabilim Dalı, Ankara.
4. Ayhan, U. (2026). The Architecture of Narrative Dominance: Confronting Data Terror and the Rise of Cognitive Warfare. In Navigating Public Security in the Age of Post-Truth: Challenges and Implications (pp. 1-26). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
5. Bazzell, M. (2016). Open source intelligence techniques: resources for searching and analyzing online information. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
6. Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. N. (2019). The global disinformation order: 2019 global inventory of organised social media manipulation. Project on Computational Propaganda. Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford University Press.
7. Chen, L., Chen, J., & Xia, C. (2022). Social network behavior and public opinion manipulation. Journal of Information Security and Applications, 64, 103060.
8. Chesney, R., & Citron, D. (2019). Deepfakes and the new disinformation war: The coming age of post-truth geopolitics. Foreign Aff., 98, 147.

9. Floridi, L., & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds and machines, 30(4), 681-694.
10. Ghioni, R., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2024). Open source intelligence and AI: a systematic review of the GELSI literature. AI & society, 39(4), 1827-1842.
11. Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media. Yale University Press.
12. Hulnick, A. S. (2002). The downside of open source intelligence. International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 15(4), 565-579.
13. Huysmans, J. (2006). The politics of insecurity: Fear, migration and asylum in the EU. Routledge.
14. Koops, B. J., Hoepman, J. H., & Leenes, R. (2013). Open-source intelligence and privacy by design. Computer Law & Security Review, 29(6), 676-688.
15. Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 353–369.
16. Lowenthal, M. M. (2025). Intelligence: From secrets to policy. CQ press.
17. Milli, S., Carroll, M., Wang, Y., Pandey, S., Zhao, S., & Dragan, A. D. (2025). Engagement, user satisfaction, and the amplification of divisive content on social media. PNAS nexus, 4(3), pgaf062.
18. Napoli, P. M. (2019). Social media and the public interest: Media regulation in the disinformation age. Columbia University Press.
19. National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2024). Artificial intelligence risk management framework (AI RMF 1.0): Generative AI profile (NIST AI 600-1). https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ai/NIST.AI.600-1.pdf
20. NATO Allied Command Transformation. (2022). RFI 022059 – Questions and answers (QA1a). https://www.act.nato.int/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/rfi022059_qa1a.pdf
21. NATO Science and Technology Organization. (2025). Cognitive warfare: NATO chief scientist research report. NATO STO.
22. Office of the Director of National Intelligence. (2019). National intelligence strategy of the United States of America. https://www.intelligence.gov/templates/intelgovtemplate/custom-sections/the-nis-at-a-glance/nis-2023/pdf/nis-2019.pdf
23. Office of the Director of National Intelligence. (2024). Intelligence Community open source intelligence strategy. OSINT_Strategy.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/IC_
24. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin Press.
25. Van Puyvelde, D., & Rienzi, F. T. (2025). The rise of open-source intelligence. European Journal of International Security, 10(4), 530-544.
26. Rastogi, N., Dutta, S., Gittens, A., Zaki, M. J., & Aggarwal, C. (2022, December). TINKER: A framework for Open source Cyberthreat Intelligence. In 2022 IEEE International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (TrustCom) (pp. 1569-1574). IEEE.
27. Rid, T., & Buchanan, B. (2015). Attributing cyber attacks. Journal of strategic studies, 38(12), 4-37.
28. Saroğlu, Z. C. (2026). Perception Management Through Implicit Learning in Digital Media. In Rethinking Techno-Politics in the Digital Age: Global Technology Relations and Security (pp. 223-240). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
29. Schwille, M., Atler, A., Welch, J., Paul, C., & Baffa, R. C. (2020). Intelligence Support for Operations in the Information Environment: Dividing Roles and Responsibilities Between Intelligence and Information Professionals.
30. van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & de Waal, M. (2018). The platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford University Press.
31. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151.