Makine Merkezli Kamu Diplomasisinde Etik ve Etki Sorunsalı

Abstract

Uygulayıcısı ve hedef kitlesi insan olan kamu diplomasisi faaliyetleri makine merkezli bir sisteme dönüşmüştür. Makine merkezli kamu diplomasisinin temel odak noktası yapay zekâ teknolojisine dayanmaktadır. Diğer bütün alanlardaki uygulamalarında olduğu gibi kamu diplomasisi faaliyetlerinde de yapay zekânın kullanımı, etki ve etik tartışmasını içermektedir. Literatür analizine yönelik akademik çalışmalar; kamu diplomasisi alanıyla ilgili çalışmaların kavram, kurum, aktör ve eylem temelli analizlere odaklandığını göstermektedir. Bu makalede kamu diplomasisi faaliyetlerinde yapay zekâ kullanımı, etik ve etki sorunsalı çerçevesinde analiz edilmiştir. Kamu diplomasisi literatürü insani etki ve iletişim çerçevesinde sınıflandırılmıştır. Bu sınıflandırma sonucunda insan faktörünün ve etkisinin azaldığı makine merkezli kamu diplomasisi etki ve etik bağlamında analiz edilmiştir. Analiz yapay zekâ tartışmalarının merkezinde yer alan “kontrol”, “denetim”, “güvenlik” ve “etik çerçeve” ile kamu diplomasisi eylemlerinin tartışma konusu olan “eylemin etkisi” bağlamı çerçevesinde oluşturulmuştur. Araştırma sonucunda makine merkezli kamu diplomasisinde yapay zekâ kullanımının hukuki ve fikri alt yapı eksikliği, denetim ve kontrol ikilemi, internet ve bilgiye erişimde bilgi açığı oluşturma, kaynak ve hedef kitlenin belirsizleşmesi, teknolojik belirlenimcilik gibi konularda çeşitli eksiklikler ve sorunlar içerdiği görülmektedir. 

Keywords

• Kamu Diplomasisi
• İnsan Makine Etkileşimi
• Yapay Zekâ
• Yeni Kamu Diplomasisi
• Makine Merkezli Kamu Diplomasisi

Ethical and Impact Issues in Machine-Centered Public Diplomacy

Abstract

Public diplomacy activities, whose practitioner and target audience are human, have turned into a machine-centered system. The main focus of machine-centered public diplomacy is based on artificial intelligence technology. The use of artificial intelligence in public diplomacy activities, as in other fields, includes the discussion of impact and ethics. Literature reviews show that studies in the field of public diplomacy mostly analyze concepts, institutions, actors and actions. In this article, the use of artificial intelligence in public diplomacy activities are analyzed within the framework of ethical and impact problematic. Public diplomacy literature has been classified in the context of human communication. The analysis is shaped on two pillars. first, the "control", "audit", "security", and "ethical context" that is at the center of the AI discussions. second, in the context of the "effect of action", which is the subject of debate in public diplomacy studies. As a result of the research, it is seen that the use of artificial intelligence in public diplomacy actions includes problems such as lack of legal and intellectual infrastructure, audit and control dilemma. Another result is the uncertainty of the source and target audience, and the emergence of the problem of technological determinism.

Keywords

• Public Diplomacy
• Human Machine Interaction
• Artificial Intelligence
• New Public Diplomacy
• Machine-Centered Public Diplomacy

References

1. Amaresh, P. (2020). Artificial Intelligence: A New driving horse in International Relations and Diplomacy, Diplomatist, Erişim adresi, https://diplomatist. com/2020/05/13/artificial-intelligence-a-new-driving-horse-in-international-relations-and-diplomacy/ Erişim tarihi: 01.02.2021.
2. Barojan, D. (2018). Both, Botnet ve Trolleri Anlamak, Newslab Turkey. Erişim adresi, https://www.newslabturkey.org/2018/12/06/bot-botnet-ve-trolleri-anlamak/ Erişim tarihi:03.03.2021.
3. BBC News. (2005). Envoy's Mid-east trip to revamp US image, 27 Eylül 2005. Erişim adresi, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4285102.stm Erişim tarihi: 15.11.2020.
4. Bjola, C. (2019). Diplomacy in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. Erişim adresi, http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/rielcano_en/contenido WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/elcano/elcano_in/zonas_in/ari98-2019-bjola-diplomacy-in-the-age-of-artificial-intelligence Erişim tarihi: 20.01.2021.
5. Chapman, J. (2019). Exploring the Threats and Opportunities of Cyber Diplomacy at PolicyWest, Public Diplomacy Magazine, Issue 2019, Winter, 11-14.
6. Chessen, M. (2017a). Understanding The Psychology Behind Computational Propaganda. Shawn Powers and Markos Kounalakis (ed.), Can Public Diplomacy Survıve The Internet? Bots, Echochambers and Disinformation içinde (19-27.ss.) Erişim adresi: https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/2017-ACPD-Internet.pdf. Erişim tarihi: 23.04.2021.
7. Chessen, M. (2017b). Understanding The Challenges of Artificialintellingence and Computational Propanganda to Public Diplomacy. Shawn Powers and Markos
8. Kounalakis (ed.), Public Diplomacy Survıve The Internet? Bots, Echochambers and Disinformation içinde (39-49. ss.). Erişim adresi: https://www. state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/2017-ACPD-Internet.pdf Erişim tarihi: 23.04.2021

9. Cull, J, H. (2009). Public Diplomacy: Lessons Form The Past, Los Angeles: Figueroa Press
10. Dilek, G. Ö. (2019). Yapay Zekânın Etik Gerçekliği, AUSBD, 2(4): 47-59. e-ISSN: 2651-3064
11. Diplo (2020). Asia and Europe Public Diplomacy, Diplo.com, Erişim adresi: https://www. diplomacy.edu/asia-europe Erişim tarihi: 22.03.2021.
12. Fitzpatrick, K.R. (2011). U.S. Public Diplomacy in a Post-9/11 World: From Messaging to Mutuality. CPD Perspectives on Public Diplomacy, Paper 6. Los Angles: Figueroa Press
13. Fitzpatrick, K.R.( 2008). The Collapse of American Public Diplomacy , What Diplomatic Expert say About Rebuilding America’s Image in The World, Erişim adresi, http:// www.publicdiplomacy.org/Fitzpatrick2008.pdf Erişim tarihi: 20.03.2021.
14. Flew, T., Hartig, F. (2014); Confucius institutes and the network communication approach to public diplomacy. The IAFOR Journal of Asian Studies, 1(1), 27-44.
15. Gilboa, E. (2001). Diplomacy in the media age: Three models of uses and effects. Diplomacy and Statecraft, 12 (2), 1 – 28.
16. Gouveia, P.F ve Plumridge, H. (2005). European Infopolitik: Developing EU Public Diplomacy Strategy, London: The Foreign Policy Centre. Erişim adresi http:// www.kamudiplomasisi.org/pdf/kitaplar/EUpublicdiplomacystrategy.pdf Erişim tarihi: 14. 11. 2020
17. Gregory, B. (2005). Public Diplomacy and Strategic Communication: Cultures, Firewalls, and Imported Norms, American Political Science Association Conference on International Communication and Conflict, erişim adresi , http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.112.7338&rep=rep1&type=pdf Erişim tarihi: 18.04.2021.
18. Gregory, B. (2009). Mapping Smart Power in Multi-stakeholder Public Diplomacy / Strategic Communication, New Approaches to U.S. Global Outreach Conferansı, George Washington University, 5 Ekim 2009. Erişim adresi, https://pdaa. publicdiplomacy.org/?p=52 Erişim tarihi: 18.04.2021
19. Gregory, B. (2011). American Public Diplomacy: Enduring Characteristics, Elusive Transformation, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 6 (2011) 351-372.
20. Grottola, S. (2018). Artificial Intelligence And Diplomacy: A New Tool For Diplomats. Erişim adresi https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/artificial-intelligence-and-diplomacy-new-tool-diplomats Erişim tarihi: 18.04.2021
21. Günek, A. (2018). Amerikan Kamu Diplomasisinin Üç Evresi: Propaganda, Geleneksel Kamu Diplomasi ve Stratejik İletişim, The Journal of Social Science , 2 (3) 54-72 . DOI: 10.30520/tjsosci.425898
22. Hamad Almuftah , H., Weerakkody, V., Sivarajah, U. (2016). E-Diplomacy: a SystematicLiterature Review, ICEGOV2016, March 1–3, 2016, Montevideo, Uruguay. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/12345.67890
23. Helmers, H. (2016) Public Diplomacy in Early Modern Europe, Media History, 22 (3-4) 401-420, DOI: 10.1080/13688804.2016.1174570
24. Hocking, B. (2005). Rethinking the New Public Diplomacy, Jan Melissen (ed.), The New Public Diplomacy, Soft Power in İnternational Relations içinde (28-41) Palgrave Macmillan Institute For Cultural Diplomacy (tarihsiz), Waht is Cultural Diplomacy? What is Soft Power?, erişim adresi, https://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/index.php?en_culturaldiplomacy#:~:text=%22Cultural%20Diplomacy%20may%20best%20be,beyond%3B%20Cultural%20diplomacy%20can%20be Erişim tarihi: 25.05. 2021 Jackson, D. (2019). You Can’t Solve Lying: Adapting to the Disinformation Age, Public Diplomacy Magazine, Issue 22, Winter 2019, 40-43
25. Jones, L. (2005). Karen Hughes’ “Listening Tour” and Its Aftermath Selling America to theMuslim World, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, December 2005, 24-26. Erişim adresi https://www.wrmea.org/005-december/two-views-karen-hughes-listening-tour-and-its-aftermath.html Erişim tarihi: 20.11.2020
26. Leorand, M., Stead, C ve Smewing, C. (2002). Public Diplomacy, The Foreign Policy Centre, London: Panton Hause
27. Lord, C. (1998). The Past and Future of Public Diplomacy, Orbis, Winter, 1998, 49-79.
28. Manor, I (2018). The Digitalization of Diplomacy: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Terminology, Working Paper No 2. Oxford Digital Diplomacy Research Group. Erişim adresi http://www.qeh.ox.ac.uk/sites/www.odid.ox.ac.uk/files/DigDiploROxWP2.pdf Erişim tarihi: 15.02.2021.
29. Manor, I. (2016). What is Digital Diplomacy, and how is it Practiced around the World? A brief introduction, The 2016 Annual Review of the Diplomatist Magazine. Erişim Adresi https://digdipblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/dig-dip-intro-diplomatist.pdf Erişim tarihi: 10.02.2021.
30. Manor, I. (2017). The Digitalization of Diplomacy: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Terminology. Working Paper. Exploring Digital Diplomacy, (Ağustos 2017). Erişim Adresi https://digdipblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/the-digitalization-of-diplomacy-working-paper-number-1.pdf Erişim tarihi: 15.02.2021.
31. McClory, J. (2015). The Soft Power 30 A Global Ranking of Power, Report Portland. Erişim adresi, https://portland-communications.com/pdf/The-Soft-Power_30.pdf Erişim tarihi: 20.02.2021.
32. McLuhan, M ve Fiore, Q (2012). Medya Mesajı, Medya Masajıdır, İlke Haydaroğlu(Çev), İstanbul: MediaCat
33. Mellisen, J. (2005). The New Public Diplomacy: Between Theory and Practice, Jean Mellisen (ed.), The New Public Diplomacy Soft Power in International Relations içinde (3-28. ss.) Palgrave Macmillan
34. Norrman, K.E. (2013). Definitions, Ideas, Visions and Challenges for Cultural Diplomacy, E International Relations. Erişim adresi http://www.e-ir.info/2013/01/03/definitions-ideas-visions-and-challenges-for-cultural-diplomacy/ Erişim tarihi: 13. 05. 2021
35. Ombudsman.gov.tr. (Tarihsiz). İnsan Hakları Evrensel Beyannamesi. Erişim adresi https://www.ombudsman.gov.tr/document/mevzuat/688B1--Insan-Haklari-Evrensel-Beyannamesi.pdf
36. Pantoja, Y. M. (2018). How Do Non-State Actors Enhance PD?, USC Center on Public Diplomacy. Erişim adresi, https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/how-do-non-state actors-enhance-pd Erişim tarihi: 20. 01.2021.
37. Puaschunder, J. M. (2019). Artificial Diplomacy: A Guide for Public Officials to Conduct Artificial Intelligence, Journal of Applied Research in the Digital Economy, (1) 39-54., http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3376302 Erişim tarihi: 20. 01. 2021.
38. Riordan, S. (2019). Cyber-diplomacy: Why Diplomats Need to Get Into Cyberspace, Public Diplomacy Magazine, Issue 2019, Winter. 09-11.
39. Segal, A. (2017). Chinese Cyber Diplomacy in a New Era of Uncertainty, A Hoover Institution Essay, Aegis Paper Series No. 170. Erişim adresi,https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/research/docs/segal_chinese_cyber_diplomacy.pdf Erişim tarihi: 16.04.2021.
40. Sevin, E., Metzgar, E.T, Hayden, C. (2019). The Scholarship of Public Diplomacy: Analysis of a Growing Field, Marine Corps University, USA International Journal of Communication, 13(2019), 4814–4837
41. USC Center on Public Diplomacy at the Annenberg School ve Clingendael Netherland Institute of International Relations (2014). The Digital Diplomacy Bibliogrpy. Erişim Adresi https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/Digital_Diplomacy_Bibliography_2014_CLI-CPD.pdf Erişim tarihi: 18.02.2021.
42. Ünver, H.A (2017). Bilişimsel Diplomasi, Kadir Has Üniversitesi ve EDAM, Siber Politikalar ve Dijital Demokrasi Serisi, 2017/3
43. Wallin, M (2012). The New Public Diplomacy Imperative, American Secrity Project. Erişim adresi https://www.americansecurityproject.org/public-diplomacy-and-strategic communication/the-new-public-diplomacy-imperative/ Erişim tarihi: 20.04.2021.
44. Wang, W (Tarihsiz). Analysis on China’s Cyber Diplomacy. Erişim adresi https://dspace.uni.lodz.pl/bitstream/handle/11089/12507/10-143_159-Wang.pdf sequence=1&isAllowed=y Erişim tarihi: 20.05.2021.
45. Wharton, B. (2017). Remarks on Public Diplomacy In Post Truth Society. Shawn Powers and Markos Kounalakis (ed.), Public Diplomacy Survıve The Internet? Bots, Echochambers and Disinformation içinde (7-13. ss.)
46. Woolley, S.C. (2017). Computational Propaganda and Political Bots: An Overview. Shawn Powers and Markos Kounalakis (ed.), Public Diplomacy Survıve The Internet? Bots, Echochambers and Disinformation içinde (13-19.ss.)
47. Yargıtay.gov.tr. (Tarihsiz). Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi. Erişim adresi, https://www. yargitay.gov.tr/documents/AIHM.pdf Erişim tarihi: 15.05. 2021.
48. Zaharna, R. S. (2007). The Soft Power Differential: Network Communication and Mass Communication In Public Diplomacy, The Hague Journal of Public Diplomacy, (3) 2, 213-228.
49. Zaharna, R. S. (2012). Analyzing China’s Confucius Institutes as a Network Public Diplomacy Initiative. Paper prepared for International Studies Association, San Diego, CA, Nisan 1-4, 2012.