BBC’nin Sorumlu Yapay Zekâ Politikası ve Anadolu Ajansı’nın Medyada Yapay Zekâ Etik Kullanım Rehberi’nin Nitel Doküman Analizi

Öz

Bu çalışmada, dijital dönüşümün medya sektörüne yansımaları British Broadcasting Corporation’ın (BBC) ‘Sorumlu Yapay Zekâ Politikası’ ile Anadolu Ajansı’nın (AA) ‘Medyada Yapay Zekâ Etik Kullanım Rehberi’ üzerinden incelenmektedir. Nitel doküman analizi yöntemiyle incelenen metinler, her iki kurumun da yapay zekâ (YZ) teknolojilerini insan odaklı bir yaklaşımla ele aldığını ortaya koymaktadır. Kuruluşlar, otonom sistemleri editoryal muhakemenin yerini alan bir unsur değil, insan yeteneklerini destekleyen bir araç olarak konumlandırmaktadır. Buna karşın ilkelerin uygulanmasında yapısal farklılıklar mevcuttur. BBC, denetimi dikey bir idari hiyerarşi ve yöneticilerin katı sorumlulukları üzerinden kurgularken; AA, kontrol yetkisini gazetecilerin editoryal inisiyatifine bırakan esnek bir model benimsemektedir. Şeffaflık ilkelerinde BBC kurum içi süreçlere ağırlık verirken, AA okuyucuya yönelik anlık görsel bilgilendirmeleri zorunlu kılmaktadır. BBC’nin dikey yapısı onay süreçlerinde bürokratik hantallığa yol açabilecek bir unsur olarak öne çıkarken; AA’nın esnek modeli, idari netlik ve yaptırım gücü bakımından ilkelerin kurumsal bir tavsiye niteliğinde kalmasına neden olabilmektedir. İlgili çalışma, YZ politikalarının uygulanmasında dikey denetim yapıları ile editoryal esneklik arasındaki farkları ve bu durumun kurumsal süreçlere yansımalarını göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yapay Zekâ Yönetişimi
• Medya Etiği
• AA
• BBC
• Doküman Analizi

A Qualitative Document Analysis of the BBC’s Responsible AI Policy and Anadolu Agency’s Guidelines for the Ethical Use of AI in Media

Öz

This study examines the reflections of digital transformation in the media sector through the British Broadcasting Corporation’s (BBC) 'Responsible AI Policy' and Anadolu Agency’s (AA) 'Ethics Guidelines for the Use of AI in Media'. Analyzed through the qualitative document analysis method, the texts reveal that both institutions approach artificial intelligence (AI) technologies with a human-centered perspective. The organizations position autonomous systems not as a replacement for editorial judgment, but as a tool to enhance human capabilities. However, structural differences exist in the implementation of these principles. While the BBC structures oversight through a vertical administrative hierarchy and rigid managerial responsibilities, AA adopts a flexible model that entrusts control authority to journalists' editorial initiative. Regarding transparency principles, the BBC emphasizes internal corporate processes, whereas AA mandates real-time visual notifications targeting the audience. While the BBC's vertical structure stands out as an element that may lead to bureaucratic delays in approval processes, AA's flexible model may cause the principles to remain merely institutional recommendations in terms of administrative clarity and enforcement power. The study demonstrates the differences between vertical oversight structures and editorial flexibility in the implementation of AI policies, as well as their implications for organizational processes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Artificial Intelligence Governance
• Media Ethics
• Anadolu Agency
• BBC
• Document Analysis

Kaynakça

1. Adır, E. K. (2023). *Robotların yol açtığı zararlardan doğan hukuki sorumluluk*. Yetkin Yayınları.
2. Anadolu Ajansı. (2024). *Medyada yapay zekâ etik kullanım rehberi*. Haber Akademisi. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/haberakademisi/haberler/medyada-yapay-zeka-etik-kullanim-rehberi/533264
3. Ananny, M. ve Crawford, K. (2018). Seeing without knowing: Limitations of the transparency ideal and its application to algorithmic accountability. *New Media & Society, 20*(3), 973–989. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816676645
4. Araujo, T., Helberger, N., Kruikemeier, S. ve de Vreese, C. H. (2020). In AI we trust? Perceptions of automated decision-making by AI vs. humans. *AI & Society, 35*(3), 611–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-019-00931-w
5. Beckett, C. & Yaseen, M. (2023). *Generating change: A global survey of what news organisations are doing with AI*. POLIS, London School of Economics and Political Science.
6. Blumler, J. G. (Ed.). (1992). *Television and the public interest: Vulnerable values in West European broadcasting*. Sage Publications.
7. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. *Qualitative Research Journal, 9*(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
8. British Broadcasting Corporation. (2023). *Responsible AI policy*. BBC Editorial Guidelines. https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidance/responsible-ai-policy

9. Bruns, A. (2019). *Are filter bubbles real?* Polity Press.
10. Bryson, J. J. (2018). Patiency is not a virtue: AI ethics and the design of ethical AI. *Minds and Machines, 28*(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9461-x
11. Cath, C. (2018). Governing artificial intelligence: Ethical, legal and technical opportunities and challenges. *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376*(2133), Article 20180080. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0080
12. Christian, B. (2020). *The alignment problem: Machine learning and human values*. W. W. Norton & Company.
13. Couldry, N. ve Hepp, A. (2017). *The mediated construction of reality*. Polity Press.
14. Couldry, N. ve Mejias, U. A. (2019). *The costs of connection: How data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism*. Stanford University Press.
15. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Dijital Dönüşüm Ofisi. (2024). *Ulusal yapay zekâ stratejisi 2024–2025 eylem planı*. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Dijital Dönüşüm Ofisi Başkanlığı.
16. Diakopoulos, N. (2019). *Automating the news: How algorithms are rewriting the media*. Harvard University Press.
17. Diakopoulos, N. (2020). Computational news discovery: Towards design considerations for editorial orientation algorithms in journalism. *Digital Journalism, 8*(7), 945–967. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1732812
18. Dignum, V. (2019). *Responsible artificial intelligence: How to develop and use AI in a responsible way*. Springer Nature.
19. Durmuş, T. ve Doğan, A. (2026). Yapay zekâ videolarının sosyal medya kullanıcıları üzerindeki gerçeklik etkisi. *İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi*, (73), 42–63.
20. Elish, M. C. (2019). Moral crumple zones: Cautionary tales in human-robot interaction. *Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, 5*, 40–60. https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2019.260
21. Floridi, L. ve Cowls, J. (2022). A unified framework of five core principles for AI in society. L. Floridi (Ed.), *Ethics, governance, and policies in artificial intelligence* içinde (ss. 5–31). Springer.
22. Fuchs, C. (2021). *Digital labour and Karl Marx*. Routledge.
23. Helberger, N. (2021). The political economy of AI in media: Towards a risk-based ethical framework. *European Journal of Communication, 36*(1), 14–33.
24. Helberger, N., Pierson, J. ve Poell, T. (2018). Governing online platforms: From freedom of expression to public values. *Digital Journalism, 6*(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1337488
25. Kaminski, M. E. ve Malgieri, G. (2021). Algorithmic impact assessments under the GDPR: Law, policy, and practice. *Computer Law & Security Review, 41*, Article 105559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2021.105559
26. McQuail, D. (1992). *Media performance: Mass communication and the public interest*. Sage Publications.
27. Milan, S. (2015). From social movements to cloud protesting: The evolution of collective action. *Information, Communication & Society, 18*(3), 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.987140
28. Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S. ve Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. *Big Data & Society, 3*(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679679
29. Noble, S. U. (2018). *Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism*. New York University Press.
30. Pariser, E. (2011). *The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you*. Penguin UK.
31. Pasquale, F. (2015). *The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information*. Harvard University Press.
32. Patton, M. Q. (2014). *Qualitative research & evaluation methods* (4. baskı). Sage Publications.
33. Poell, T., Nieborg, D. B. ve Duffy, B. E. (2021). *Platforms and cultural production*. Polity Press.
34. Rahwan, I. (2018). Society-in-the-loop: Programming the algorithmic social contract. *Ethics and Information Technology, 20*(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-017-9430-8
35. Ramos, G. (2023). *Ethics of artificial intelligence*. https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics
36. Al-Rawi, A. & Fakida, A. (2023). The methodological challenges of studying “fake news”. *Journalism Practice, 17*(6), 1178–1197.
37. Russell, S. (2019). *Human compatible*. Penguin Random House Audio Publishing Group.
38. Scannell, P. (1989). Public service broadcasting and modern public life. *Media, Culture & Society, 11*(2), 135–166.
39. Shneiderman, B. (2020). Human-centered artificial intelligence: Reliable, safe & trustworthy. *International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36*(6), 495–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1741118
40. Sorensen, J. K. (2020). Public service algorithms: Rethinking recommendation systems for public media. *Media, Culture & Society, 42*(1), 155–170.
41. Suchman, L. (2007). *Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions* (2. baskı). Cambridge University Press.
42. Sunstein, C. R. (2017). *#Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media*. Princeton University Press.
43. Tracey, M. (1998). *The decline and fall of public service broadcasting*. Oxford University Press.
44. Ulaş, M. (2025). Akademisyenlerin yapay zekâ teknolojilerini kullanma motivasyonları üzerine nitel bir araştırma. *Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 34*(Uygarlığın Dönüşümü: Yapay Zekâ), 142–159.
45. Van Dijck, J. ve Poell, T. (2013). Understanding social media logic. *Media and Communication, 1*(1), 2–14. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v1i1.70
46. Wagner, B. (2018). Ethics washing in AI governance: A critical evaluation of corporate ethics codes. *Ethics and Information Technology, 20*(2), 83–95.
47. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2018). *Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri* (11. baskı). Seçkin Yayıncılık.
48. Yin, R. K. (2018). *Case study research and design: Methods and applications* (6. baskı). Sage Publications.
49. Zou, J. ve Schiebinger, L. (2018). AI can be sexist and racist—it’s time to make it fair. *Nature, 559*(7714), 324–326. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05707-8
50. Zuboff, S. (2019). *The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power*. PublicAffairs.