Held on November 9, the roundtable forum “New Research Agenda for Communication Studies in the AI Era: Rebalancing Technology, Humanities, and the Public Sphere” was successfully convened at the Zijingang International Hotel in Hangzhou. As a key component of Zhejiang University's annual “Digital Social Sciences Research Initiative” conference, this forum was hosted by Zhejiang University and co-organized by the School of Media and International Culture, the Digital Social Sciences Research Initiative, and the English-language journal Communication and the Public. It brought together leading scholars from diverse disciplines worldwide for in-depth discussions on core issues in communication studies during the AI era.
At the outset of the forum, Hong Yu, Deputy Dean of the School of Journalism and Communication at Zhejiang University, delivered an opening address detailing the conference's origins and objectives. She noted that amid the rapid proliferation of AI technology and iterative advancements in media platforms, reconstructing research methodologies and frameworks within communication studies has become an urgent imperative. Subsequently, Hong Yu outlined the developmental trajectory of the English-language journal Communication and the Public. Launched in 2016 through collaboration with international publisher Sage, the journal has progressed through three distinct phases: "establishing its brand," "building its team," and "expanding its horizons." It is now indexed in multiple international databases including Scopus and ESCI, and was further selected for inclusion in the Chinese Academy of Sciences' Journal Classification List in 2025. Following the formation of its new editorial team, the journal has expanded its research scope to encompass public culture, public policy, and public trust, striving to establish a broader international academic exchange platform.
Chen Hongliang, Associate Professor with tenure at Zhejiang University's School of Media and International Culture, elaborated on the journal's core positioning. Quoting the inaugural message from newly appointed Editor-in-Chief Wu Fei, he emphasised the publication's commitment to continually interrogating the dynamic interplay between media, society and the individual, thereby forging an academic public sphere for intellectual discourse.
During the central roundtable discussion, Chen Hongliang guided the panelists in an in-depth exchange centred on "The Public Sphere under Algorithmic Intermediation".
Professor Yu Guoming of the School of Journalism and Communication at Beijing Normal University opened by pointing out that the "mimetic environment" of the mass communication era differs fundamentally from that of the digital intelligence era, and traditional public sphere research logic cannot be applied simplistically. He noted that social structures are shifting from pyramidal to flat, distributed configurations. As a novel form of connectivity, algorithmic civilisation may not necessarily lead to "information silos"; some research indicates that large language models can provide "middle-ground answers," offering rational individuals points of reflection. Simultaneously, he emphasised that contemporary communication phenomena have reached an "ecological-level" complexity, necessitating an upgrade of communication studies' research paradigms towards complexity frameworks. This requires incorporating new methodologies such as nonlinear and fractal theories.
Professor Lan Jiang of Nanjing University's Department of Philosophy addressed the temporal limitations of Habermas's theory, noting that his work The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere rests upon a strict distinction between public and private spheres. Yet in the digital age, these boundaries have progressively blurred, and Habermas himself lacked direct experience of digital life, rendering his theory ill-suited to contemporary realities. Using Nanjing University's "King Crab Incident" as an example, he demonstrates how the operational logic of the digital-age public sphere has shifted towards an "attention economy." Public discourse no longer relies on rational confrontation but instead achieves public opinion steering through attention-based competition, significantly lowering participation barriers for ordinary citizens.
Zeng Bailing, Director of the Editorial Board of Modern Publishing, emphasizes that the essence of the public sphere lies in the process of “transforming individual opinions into public opinion.” He points out that in the traditional era of mass communication, the threshold for individuals to express themselves publicly was extremely high. However, in the digital age, self-media has broken through material and institutional constraints, making public expression readily accessible. However, individuals now simultaneously embody dual roles as “private rights holders” and “public opinion publishers.” This blurred subject definition has fueled chaos in self-media platforms. Current governance has shifted from “content regulation” to “user regulation,” reflecting a redefinition of participation boundaries within the public sphere.
Professor Zhang Weiyu from the National University of Singapore participated in the online discussion, clarifying that Habermas's public sphere theory is a “normative study.” Its core value lies in providing an ideal direction for the pursuit of public space, with its “communicative rationality” encompassing three dimensions: authenticity, truth, and sincerity, which remain relevant today. She also cautioned that generative AI and agentic AI pose more fundamental challenges to the public sphere than algorithmic AI, potentially leading to issues such as truth confusion and subject ambiguity, which require close attention.
Wang Wei, a researcher under the "Hundred Talents Programme" at Zhejiang University's School of Media and International Culture, explored the concepts of the "personal sphere" and the "hybrid sphere". She contends that with AI technology, individuals can cultivate exclusive "personal domains" to access diverse information through algorithms, while the interwoven "hybrid domain" of online and offline spaces serves as an interface connecting personal and public discourse. Algorithms function as both "magnets" (aggregating information) and "filters" (screening content). In the digital age, publicness need not insist on consensus; fragmented coexistence and participation hold equal value.
Cui Zhaopeng, a researcher under the Hundred Talents Programme at Zhejiang University's School of Computer Science and Technology and concurrently serving as Deputy Dean of the School of Media and International Culture, analysed the underlying technological logic. He noted that all AI algorithmic behaviours are determined by human-set optimisation objectives. The current phenomenon of "information homogenisation" stems from platform designs prioritising click-through rates and dwell time, which can be mitigated by adjusting the objective function. However, the "hallucination" issue in generative AI currently lacks mature control theories, necessitating interdisciplinary collaboration combined with policy constraints and humanistic guidance.
In her concluding remarks, drawing on grassroots practical experience, Hong Yu emphasised that the core mechanism for private issues entering the public sphere is the pressure of collective interests. The essence of publicness fundamentally concerns the interests of the vast majority. She called upon communication scholars to delve into the technological "black box", understand the design logic and political intent of algorithms, explore "publicness algorithms" that amplify public demands, and drive technology to serve the public interest.
During the Q&A session, attendees and guests engaged in lively discussions, delving further into topics such as innovative research methodologies and pathways for interdisciplinary collaboration. This forum brought together perspectives from multiple disciplines including computer science, philosophy, and journalism and communication. It reflected on the temporal limitations of traditional theories while exploring new directions for communication research in the AI era, offering significant insights for future academic research and practical applications. Moving forward, the organisers will continue to promote interdisciplinary and international academic exchanges, injecting fresh momentum into the innovative development of communication research in the digital age.