Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as an essential technology of contemporary geopolitical power, with nations framing its development as an indispensable tool for future prosperity (Bareis & Katzenbach, 2022). This global “AI race” is not merely a technical competition but a discursive one, shaped by “sociotechnical imaginaries” (Jasanoff & Kim, 2015) that define what society deems possible or desirable. Existing research reveals a systematic polarization in media coverage, where narratives oscillate between techno-solutionist optimism and existential dystopia (Brennen et al., 2018; Fast & Horvitz, 2017). However, a critical Sustainability Paradox remains largely unexplored: while AI is frequently promoted as a solution for global sustainability, its own material body – characterized by massive energy consumption and resource extraction – is often sidelined or hidden (Brevini, 2023; Lupano, 2025. Schütze, 2024). This leads to an opposition between AI for sustainability (solving issues) and Sustainability of AI (material exhaustion) narratives.
The motivation for this research is to move beyond polarized thematic studies by investigating the linguistic mechanisms that make these paradoxical futurologies credible. Using a diachronic analysis of the “AI pivot” (2020-2025) across four newspapers: The New York Times (US), The Guardian (UK), Le Monde (France) and La Presse (Canada/Québec), I will address five strategic gaps in international research. First, I will employ lexicometric mapping of the Power/Energy nexus to quantify if and how techno-solutionism (AI race) masks material exhaustion (energy race). Second, I will investigate the discursive staging of authority by establishing a typology of voices, such as those of the ‘Prophet’ or the ‘Regulator’ who may marginalize the ‘Alarmist’ or the ‘Expert’ voices (Gras, 1976; Spurk, 2025) Third, I will deconstruct the ideological implicits within presuppositions (Levinson, 1983; Stalnaker, 1999) and implicatures (Carston, 2002) that normalize AI as an autonomous and inevitable force. Fourth, I will characterize the metaphorical and emotional configurations (Goatly, 2007; Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Martin & White, 2005) used to frame AI as a dematerialized ‘mind’, obscuring its resource-intensive ‘body’. Finally, I will offer a transnational comparison by formulating hypotheses on how language, geographic location, and political ideologies, such as unilateralism or multilateralism, influence national imaginaries (Bareis & Katzenbach, 2022; Ittefaq et al., 2025).
By 2030, my research will contribute to a heuristic blueprint for 1) replicating discourse analysis in other high-stakes AI domains and 2) generating new hypotheses regarding the national framing of AI futurology across diverse geopolitical contexts. Ultimately, this research will offer critical insights into how these specific newspapers present a future through a technology that threatens to simultaneously preserve and exhaust its own material foundations.
References
Bareis, J. & Katzenbach, C. (2022). Talking AI into Being: The Narratives and Imaginaries of National AI Strategies and Their Performative Politics, Science, Technology, & Human values 47(5), 855–881
Brevini, B. (2023). Artificial Intelligence, Artificial Solutions Placing the Climate Emergency at the Center of AI Developments. In Technology and Sustainable Development: The Promise and Pitfalls of Techno-Solutionism, New York: Routledge
Brennen, J. S., et al. (2018). An Industry-led Debate: How UK Media Cover Artificial Intelligence. The Reuters Institute.
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Blackwell Publisher.
Cave, S., Dihal, K., & Dillon, S. (2020). AI Narratives: A History of Imaginative Thinking about Intelligent Machines. Oxford University Publishing.
Chuan, C-H., Sunny Tsai, W-H., & Cho, S. (2019). Framing Artificial Intelligence in American Newspapers. The 2019 AAAI/ACM [Conference]
Fast, E., & Horvitz, E. (2017). Long-Term Trends in the Public Perception of Artificial Intelligence. AAAI, pp. 963–969.
Franck, Thomas. 2026, in press. « Termes et idéologies de la bifurcation idéologique ». In Quaderni. Communication, technologie, pouvoir. N°119.
Franck, Thomas. 2026, in press. « L’émergence du deux-roues non motorisé (1810-1850). Analyse discursive et sémio-matérielle d’un objet pris entre l’imaginaire aristocratique, la rentabilisation énergétique du capitalisme et l’exploitation populaire ». In E-Phaïstos.
Franck, Thomas. 2026, under review. "Discourse Analysis of the Formula 'transition énergétique' in a French-Language Newspaper". In Applied Corpus Linguistics.
Goatly, A. (2007). Washing the Brain – Metaphors and Hidden Ideology
Gras, A. (1976). Clefs pour la futurologie. Paris : Seghers.
Ittefaq, M., et al. (2025). Global news media coverage of artificial intelligence (AI): A comparative analysis of frames, sentiment, and trends across 12 countries. Telematic and Informatics 96–102223.
Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S-H. (2015). Dreamscapes of Modernity. Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power.University Chicago Press.
Johnson, D.G., & Verdicchio, M. (2017). AI anxiety. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 68 (9), 2267–2270.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. London: Univ. Chicago Press.
Lupano, E. (2025). Of Pride and Patriotism. The Representation of Artificial Intelligence in Chinese Official and Media Discourse. In: Lupano, E., & Orrù, Artificial Intelligence and Human Perception: Media Discourse and Public Opinion. FrancoAngeli. 83–109
Martin, J.R., & White, P.R.R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nguyen, D., & Hekman, E. (2022). The news framing of artificial intelligence: a critical exploration of how media discourses make sense of automation. AI & Society 39: 437–451.
Schütze, P. (2024). The Problem of Sustainable AI A Critical Assessment of an Emerging Phenomenon, Weizenbaum Journal of the Digital Society 4(1).
Spurk, J. (2025). Futur Antérieur: le passé, un avenir désirable? Paris : Le Bord De l’eau.
Stalnaker, R. (1999). Context and content: essays on intentionality in speech and thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.