Recently, Perplexity AI announced the launch of a fact-checking assistant on WhatsApp, sparking interest among those in the information realm, especially in the Global South. This launch is indicative of Big Tech’s rapid expansion into specialized areas that were once dominated by local innovators.
We are witnessing a transformation in AI development, where tools are evolving from general assistants to specialized applications in fields like healthcare, education, agriculture, journalism, and law. This shift offers significant opportunities but also signals a familiar concern: the concentration of power among those who control the technological infrastructure rather than diverse ideas.
Innovators in the Global South have developed culturally aware AI systems designed to meet real-world needs, such as fact-checking tools that capture local vernacular, legal chatbots explaining laws in accessible language, and healthcare apps that adapt to existing infrastructure limitations. These innovations represent a form of epistemic justice, recognizing that intelligence is shaped by language, culture, and power dynamics.
However, the emergence of these local tools is increasingly overshadowed by the arrival of global tech giants who deploy specialized AI tools embedded in widely used platforms. For instance, Perplexity’s assistant operates within WhatsApp, while Google’s Med-PaLM is trialed in hospitals for AI-supported medical decisions. The pressing question is not merely about effectiveness; it revolves around who determines knowledge, owns the platforms, and whose values are integrated into these technologies.
As we explore how local players can retain agency amidst the influence of AI, it’s crucial to reflect on the potential consequences. While there are strong arguments for media to embrace AI, without structural equity and algorithmic justice, even the most localized tools risk being overlooked, not due to lack of merit, but because of their smaller scale.
This situation demands a more nuanced perspective on digital sovereignty—not as a form of nationalism, but rather as collective empowerment. It is essential for communities and countries to shape the digital tools they employ, ensuring these tools resonate with their histories, languages, and aspirations.
Failure to achieve this could lead us to repeat historical patterns of exploitation, where digital infrastructures extract value while sidelining local systems. AI, if not carefully monitored, risks becoming a modern vehicle for dependency, mirroring past colonial practices where benefits accrued to decision-makers in distant locations.
