Interview with Josephine Lukito

Josephine Lukito came to Denmark in February to take up her position as professor at the Digital Democracy Centre and DIAS Chair. She moved to Odense from Texas, and we asked her about her research in political online communication and what drives her as a professor. She comes from a position as Assistant Professor at the School of Journalism and Media at the University of Texas at Austin.

Could you briefly outline your research area?

I use natural language processing and AI techniques to study online political communication. I’m especially interested in how different narratives or phrases flow across different digital media platforms, and how online discourse can translate into offline action, both good and bad. Recently, I’ve been really interested in understanding the role of political communication in democratic backsliding as well as what can be done to prevent it.

Your research focuses on political misinformation, digital media ecologies and language analysis - what new trends are you seeing globally right now?

I’ve seen two big trends globally over the past few years. First is the rise of “political influencers,” or digital creators who talk about politics. These opinion leaders can play an important role in shaping what their audience things about a political issue or news event, but they can also spread misinformation (intentionally or not).

The second big trend is, of course, discussions about AI (especially generative AI) and how they are used in political communication. These discussions tend to frame genAI and politics in absolute terms (is AI “good” or “bad” for democracy) but, in truth, the answer is far more complicated because people use AI tools and genAI in very different ways. Around the world, we’re seeing very different applications of AI in democracies, from the use of Diella in Albania, to the deepfaking of deceased politicians in Indonesia. For example, one of the most common uses of AI in politics is for humor, but these sort of use cases are under-studied.

What surprised you the most about moving to Denmark?

Adapting to an app-based system was a new experience, and one I didn’t necessarily anticipate. I feel like I added 30 new apps since I moved to Denmark! Setting it up took some time, but the pay off in my day-to-day life has been worth it.

What research projects are you most looking forward to developing here at SDU?

For some time, I’ve been interested in precursors to polarization and political extremism at the systemic level. Some of my past work has shown that online discourse can be used to predict offline actions, both from state actors and from citizens. I’m looking forward to expanding this work to study discursive leading indicators of polarization and extremism - basically, linguistic cues that help us understand when a group is becoming more polarized or willing to hold more politically extreme attitudes.

Which new research projects are you most excited to develop here at SDU?

I’m excited to develop digital data infrastructure that can help us better study political communication. In both policy work and academia, it’s common to hear the phrase “infrastructure isn’t sexy.” And it’s true, research infrastructure receives less attention than individual projects or studies. But research infrastructure is essential to research productivity, consistency, and quality. At SDU, I want to build secure, ethical digital data infrastructure that can be used to understand social discourse, identify systemic societal risks, understand social discourse, and improve the way we talk to each other.

How can we prevent democratic backsliding and ensure that digital democracy is a political project that supports everyone?

Which new research projects do you hope to start in Denmark that might not have been possible in the United States?

To be blunt, U.S. research is very much under attack right now. Whole disciplines are being expected to change what they research and teach, from climate work to gender studies. My home field(s) of mass communication/journalism and political science are not immune. It actually wasn’t until I moved to Denmark that I realized I had not presented my scholarship on political extremism for a few months.

It was a subconscious decision I did not realize I had made out of fear that presenting this work would put me at personal risk. So I feel relieved to be somewhere safe to do this important work again. Speaking more positively, Denmark has one of the most remarkable data registry systems globally, and the Danish research community is uniquely situated to build robust digital democracy research infrastructure. And with interdisciplinary communities such as DDC and DIAS, I think SDU is very well-suited to host an internet observatory that allows researchers to understand the impacts of digital media on societal wellbeing.

How can your research help other researchers and the everyday media users to better understand and navigate digital information flows?

My research highlights that digital information flows are often the product of intentional efforts. Lots of people, political actors, and algorithms are working hard to find and direct citizens’ attention to specific narratives. I hope my work makes people reflect more on the sources of their news, and encourages people to go beyond the initial social media post to understand a complex news story.

If you could change one thing about the global debate on misinformation and digital platforms, what would it be?

I wish there was less technological determinism. Sometimes, digital platforms are “blamed” for an infodemic or rise in misinformation. But, in truth, efforts to inject false information into the communication ecosystem have existed for a long time. What digital platforms are useful for are as amplifiers. Misinformation disseminators learn to “game the system,” effectively exploiting digital media to reach wider audiences. This is a more complex, but accurate, understanding of misinformation and digital platforms.

What do you hope your research can help change in the next 5 years?

I hope my research can continue to call out and reduce narratives that are overly polarizing or extremist. We have too many important issues from our time, from war and immigration to the global economy and health. And if we want to address these complex topics, we cannot rely on simplistic solutions. I would love to say that, in the future, we could live in a world where this research is not necessary, where political extremism and democratic backsliding are not societal problems anymore. But for as long as these issues persist, so will my work.