Keywords
artificial intelligence
data colonization
epistemology
social media
How to Cite
Abstract
Three pillars of power and epistemology – data, algorithms, and artificial intelligence – now shape what people see and how they interpret it. Algorithms are becoming the new authority, data the most valuable asset, and artificial intelligence a tool that blurs the line between reality and fiction. The aim of the study is to find out how Facebook users reacted to audiovisual content of unclear origin and to clarify whether they displayed a rational or emotional approach. The empirical part is based on an analysis of more than 500 comments under a video showing the movement of military equipment on the Polish- Belarusian border in September 2025. The reactions were evaluated using advanced algorithms of large language models. We discovered that the digital environment, characterized by information overload and the unused cognitive capacity of users, leads to a significantly higher degree of emotionality and negativity in their comments.
References
Al-Otaibi Shaha, Alnassar Allulo, Alshahrani Asma, Al- Mubarak Amany, Albugami Sara, Almutiri Nada, Albugami Aisha. 2018. „Customer Satisfaction Measurement Using Sentiment Analysis.” International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications no. 9(2). https://doi.org/10.14569/ijacsa.2018.090216 (access: 15.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Bates Dan. 2015. YouTube Is Losing Money Even Though It Has More Than 1 Billion Viewers. Daily Mail. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2970777/You-Tube-roughly-breaking-nine-years-purchased-Google-billion-viewers.html (access: 18.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Bachorowski Jo- Anne, Braaten Ellen B. 1994. „Emotional Intensity: Measurement and Theoretical Implications.” Personality and Individual Differences no. 17(2). 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191–8869(94)90025–6 (access: 20.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Baudrillard Jean. 1994. Simulacra and Simulation. Michigan.
View in Google Scholar
Buscemi Alessio, Proverbio Daniele. 2024. „ChatGPT vs Gemini vs LLaMA on Multilingual Sentiment Analysis.” arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2402.01715 (access: 21.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Capgemini Research Institute. 2023. Why Consumers Love Generative AI. https://prod.ucwe.capgemini.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Final-Web-Version-Report-Creative-Gen-AI.pdf (access: 23.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Cooke Di, Edwards Abigail, Barkoff Sophia, Kelly Kathryn. 2025. „As Good as a Coin Toss: Human Detection of AI- Generated Content.” Communications of the ACM no. 68(10). 100–109. https://doi.org/10.1145/3729417 (access: 23.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Couldry Nick, Mejias Ulises A. 2019. The Costs of Connection: How Data Is Colonising Human Life and Appropriating It for Capitalism. Stanford. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503609754 (access: 18.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Cramer Benjamin W. 2017. „The Attention Merchants: The Epic Scramble to Get Inside Our Heads.” Journal of Information Policy no. 7. 268–271. https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.7.2017.0268 (access: 18.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Farhadloo Mohsen, Rolland Erik. 2016. Fundamentals of Sentiment Analysis and Its Applications. In: Sentiment Analysis and Ontology Engineering. Studies in Computational Intelligence vol. 639. 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30319-2_1 (access: 11.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Floridi Luciano. 2014. The 4th Revolution: How the Infosphere Is Reshaping Human Reality. Oxford .
View in Google Scholar
Foucault Michel. 1994. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York.
View in Google Scholar
Habermas Jürgen. 1987. The Theory of Communicative Action: Vol. 2. Lifeworld and System – A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Cambridge.
View in Google Scholar
Harari Yuval Noah. 2019. Homo Deus: Stručná História Zajtrajška. Bratislav .
View in Google Scholar
Harari Yuval Noah. 2020. 21 Lekcií pre 21. Storočie. Bratislava.
View in Google Scholar
Horkheimer Max, Adorno Theodor W. 2002. Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments. G.S. Noerr (ed.). Stanford.
View in Google Scholar
Ivančík Radoslav. 2024. Hoax Ako Bezpečnostná Hrozba v Dobe Informačnej Obezity. Národná a Medzinárodná Bezpečnosť 2024. 135–143. https://doi.org/10.52651/nmb.c.2024.9788080406738.135–143 (access: 23.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Jukiewicz Marcin. 2025. Sentiment Analysis of Large Language Models Feedback: A Multi- Model Comparative Study in Programming Assessment. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7718099/v1 (access: 10.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Kant Immanuel. 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Paul Guyer, Allen W. Wood (eds.). Cambridge.
View in Google Scholar
Kassem Rania. 2025. Misleading Video Claims to Show NATO Troops Deploying in Poland. https://www.misbar.com/en/factcheck/2025/09/16/misleading-video-claims-show-nato-troops-deploying-poland (access: 23.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Kuang Wenyuan. 2023. Combined Resolve 24–01 Is Underway. https://www.dvidshub.net/news/456195/combined-resolve-24-01-underway (access: 20.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Lange Victor, Grünbaum Thor. 2023. „Measurement Scepticism, Construct Validation, and Methodology of Well- Being Theorising.” Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy, no. 10. https://doi.org/10.3998/ergo.4663 (access: 20.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Li King King, Rong Kang. 2018. „A Two- Step Procedure for Measuring Depth of Thinking.” SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3301853 (access: 21.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Lockhart Angus, Tessono Christelle. 2025. Evaluating Labels on AI- Generated Social Media Content. https://dais.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Human-or-Ai.pdf (access: 23.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Lu Zeyu, Huang Di, Bai Lei, Qu Jingjing, Wu Chengyue, Liu Xihui, Ouyang Wanli. 2023. Seeing Is Not Always Believing: Benchmarking Human and Model Perception of AI- Generated Images. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.13023 (access: 23.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Marr Bernard. 2025. „15 Mind- Blowing AI Statistics Everyone Must Know About Now.” Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2025/03/10/15-mindblowing-ai-statistics-everyone-must-know-about-now/ (access: 23.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
McIlwain Doris J.F., Sutton John. 2015. Methods for Measuring Breadth and Depth of Knowledge. In: The Routledge Handbook of Sport Expertise. Damian Farrow, Joe Baker (eds.). London–New York.
View in Google Scholar
Mendoza Cristian. 2022. „The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power.” Church, Communication and Culture no. 7(2). 452–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/23753234.2022.2086891 (access: 18.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
PesaCheck. 2025. Partly False: This Video Does Not Show NATO Troops Deployed in Poland. https://pesacheck.org/partly-false-this-video-does-not-show-natotroops-deployed-in-poland-7b1942576903 (access: 23.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Rachakonda Srigayatri, Talabi Oluwaseyi, Irandoust Saghar. 2020. Emotional Intensity Classification. Author Content. https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.32154.66243 (access: 24.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Rorty Richard. 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton.
View in Google Scholar
Schneble Christophe Olivier, Elger Bernice Simone, Shaw David. 2018. „The Cambridge Analytica Affair and Internet- Mediated Research.” EMBO Reports no. 19(8). https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201846579 (access: 19.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
STOP FicoPelle Mafii. 2025. Konvoj NATO smerujúci na ochranu východnej hranice do Poľska ! ❤ My sme NATO – Jeden za všetkých všetci za jedného ! To hovorí článok 5 ! [video]. Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1485039106035636&rdid=tefw4zr4TJd7WHBm (access: 20.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Toffler Alvin. 1970. Future Shock. New York.
View in Google Scholar
Toffler Alvin. 1980. The Third Wave. New York.
View in Google Scholar
van der Aalst Wil, Hinz Oliver, Weinhardt Christof. 2019. „Big Digital Platforms: Growth, Impact, and Challenges.” Business & Information Systems Engineering no 61. 645–648. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-019-00618-y (access: 17.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
Van Dijk Teun A. 2008. Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511481499 (access: 26.11.2025).
View in Google Scholar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis. Studia de Cultura