February 29, 2024
Marietje Schaake, International Policy Fellow, Stanford Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, and former European Parliamentarian, co-hosts GZERO AI, our new weekly video series intended to help you keep up and make sense of the latest news on the AI revolution. In this episode, she questions whether big tech companies can be trusted to tackle racial bias in AI, especially in the wake of Google's Gemini software controversy. Importantly, should these companies be the ones designing and deciding what that representation looks like?
This was a week full of AI-related stories. Again, the one that stood out to me was Google's efforts to correct for bias and discrimination in its generative AI model and utterly failing. We saw Gemini, the name of the model, coming up with synthetically generated images of very ethnically diverse Nazis. And of all political ideologies, this white supremacist group, of course, had few, if any, people of color in them historically. And that's the same, unfortunately, as the movement continues to exist, albeit in smaller form today.
And so, lots of questions, embarrassing rollbacks by Google about their new model, and big questions, I think, about what we can expect in terms of corrections here. Because the problem of bias and discrimination has been well researched by people like Joy Buolamwini with her new book out called “Unmasking AI,” her previous research “Codes Bias,” you know, well established how models by the largest and most popular companies are still so flawed with harmful and illegal consequence.
So, it begs the question, how much grip do the engineers developing these models really have on what the outcomes can be and how could this have gone so wrong while this product has been put onto the markets? There are even those who say it is impossible to be fully representative in a in a fair way. And it is a big question whether companies should be the ones designing and deciding what that representation looks like. And indeed, with so much power over these models and so many questions about how controllable they are, we should really ask ourselves, you know, when are these products ready to go to market and what should be the consequences when people are discriminated against? Not just because there is a revelation of an embarrassing flaw in the model, but, you know, this could have real world consequences, misleading notions of history, mistreating people against protections from discrimination.
So, even if there was a lot of outcry and sometimes even sort of entertainment about how poor this model performed, I think there are bigger lessons about AI governance to be learned from the examples we saw from Google's Gemini this past week.
More For You
Last month, Microsoft and Cyberlite launched their expanded AI Classroom Toolkit for educators. The toolkit focuses on the critical thinking skills needed to navigate an increasingly AI-powered world, with classroom-ready scenarios that help students learn how to evaluate AI-generated content, verify information, trace claims to reliable sources, and make informed decisions about what to trust online. The initiative is part of Microsoft’s broader work to help young people use AI safely and responsibly, while strengthening the judgment they need to participate confidently in an evolving digital environment. Read more here.
Most Popular
The California governor announced the move on Thursday in an open letter in which he called state-sanctioned killing “incompatible” with the state’s values and morally wrong.
- YouTube
In this GZERO Europe, Carl Bildt looks at the challenges facing Serbia’s Student List following its dramatic election victory over longtime nationalist leader Aleksandar Vučić, who had ruled the country for 14 years.
Think you know what's going on around the world? Here's your chance to prove it.
© 2025 GZERO Media. All Rights Reserved | A Eurasia Group media company.
