Photo by Codzilla on Unsplash.
What counts as “AI success”? New FORSEE research suggests it depends on where you look. In the press, AI is framed as an economic necessity. Among citizens, it is something to cope with, adapt to, or worry about.
Artificial intelligence sits at the centre of European policy debates. Calls to simplify EU legislation, for example, often invoke the need to accelerate AI innovation. Competitiveness, growth and strategic positioning feature prominently in speeches and headlines.
Public sentiment, however, remains cautious. In an Ipsos survey, only 44% of Europeans said AI brings more benefits than drawbacks, and just one in four expect it to improve their jobs or the economy.
To understand these differing hopes and fears, FORSEE researchers Charis Papaevangelou, Lucie Loubère, Nikos Smyrnaios, and Pierre Ratinaud (University of Toulouse) analysed how AI is discussed both in media and between citizens. In two new publications, Media discourse analysis and Social media analysis of AI applications, they examine more than 31,000 press articles alongside thousands of posts on Facebook, YouTube, and TikTok to uncover how AI ‘success’ is defined across the public sphere in Spain, Ireland, France, and Germany.
Necessary for Europe’s economy – or a disruptor of the social fabric?
Across the countries analysed, media coverage presents AI as a driver of productivity, competitiveness, and strategic autonomy. Its development is framed as necessary to avoid falling behind the United States and China. “Success” appears in abstract terms such as efficiency gains, investment flows, and technological sovereignty. “Failure”, in turn, is framed either as falling short of these goals or as risks becoming real.
On TikTok, YouTube, and Facebook, however, the grand narratives of competitiveness give way to a stance of conditional acceptance or even fear. At best, users discuss AI as something to use, test, or endure in their daily routines, often adopting it simply to keep up in crowded digital markets.
“Individuals are left to their own devices to navigate the fait accompli that is the integration of AI everywhere, trying to adapt to the new labour circumstances,” postdoctoral researcher Charis Papaevangelou from the University of Toulouse explains.
Often, social media users see inequality and job displacement, including the fear of these negative consequences, not as accidental side effects, but as part of the technology and its political economy. Increased productivity and automation raise fears of unemployment and widening inequality, leading some users to question how economies will function if large parts of the workforce become redundant. Others raise concerns about surveillance, deepfakes and the use of AI in warfare.
“Individuals are left to their own devices to navigate the fait accompli that is the integration of AI everywhere.”
Who gets a say?
The gap between the optimism expressed by the media and the concerns voiced by the public reflects whose voices dominate the conversation.
The analysis shows that a small network of powerful actors overwhelmingly shapes European media discourse. US technology firms such as Microsoft and Nvidia, alongside high-profile political and tech figures including Elon Musk and Donald Trump, play a central role in shaping both what is discussed and how. European leaders such as Emmanuel Macron and Mario Draghi appear most in discussions around regulation and Europe’s geopolitical position.
Meanwhile, civil society organisations, researchers, and ordinary citizens remain marginalised. They appear less frequently, often reacting to controversies rather than shaping core narratives or strategies.
While the overall pattern is consistent across countries, the FORSEE analysis also highlights important national differences. In France and Spain, media narratives strongly emphasise strategic autonomy and Europe’s role in global competition. In Ireland, discussions are more closely tied to multinational technology companies, reflecting the country’s economic structure. In Germany, the media places relatively greater emphasis on social impacts, particularly employment and inequality.
These differences show that visions of AI success are shaped by national contexts. But across all countries, a similar gap persists between institutional narratives and the everyday concerns expressed by citizens.
What remains outside the frame
Similar tensions are already visible elsewhere. As Politico reports, growing gaps between political narratives and public expectations are beginning to shape AI policy debates in the United States.
A truly distinctive European approach to AI cannot be defined solely by competitiveness or regulation. It must also reflect how people experience AI in their everyday lives.
Otherwise, the risk is clear: a policy agenda that speaks about citizens, but not with them.
For detailed national analyses and methodological notes, read the full FORSEE reports Media discourse analysis (D4.2) and the Social media analysis of AI applications (D4.1).
