Our world is becoming increasingly digital, where many aspects of life are undergoing transformation, particularly the ways people participate in their local communities, which are being significantly altered by artificial intelligence (AI) and digital platforms. For many people, however, with this rising digitalisation of even the fundamental aspects of life, it raises questions and concerns, specifically ethical and political questions about surveillance, control and ownership. On the other hand, AI and digital platforms can also enable new forms of participation and activism. There are approximately 5.6 billion social media users worldwide, all utilising digital platforms owned by large private corporations, including Google, X, and Meta, which also own Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp. These platforms, however, do not value the role they play in social movements, as they yield to the demands of governments for filtering tools that can suppress voices and amplify others (Howard, 2011, p. 896). A significant example of AI-driven digital activism can be observed in the Kenya Finance Bill 2024 protests, where AI algorithms have played a key role in creating compelling multimedia content, visually striking images, and emotional videos, as well as coordinating demonstrations (Maina, 2025, p. 21). The democratisation of access to information enabled applications to support informed civic discourse, fostering a more informed civic discourse that increased community awareness of socio-economic issues (Maina, 2025, p. 22). Furthermore, it demonstrates that understanding how AI influences civic participation is vital for achieving Sustainable Development Goal 16 (SDG 16), which advocates for peace, justice, and strong institutions (DCAF, 2025, p. 3). Digital platforms have undoubtedly transformed the way people participate in activism as they identify local needs and provide new, wider spaces for discussion, even whilst the ethicality of these tools remains critical, these same systems can hampher activism through algorithmic bias, surveillance and misinformatio,n what Morozov’s (2011, pg 895) desscirbed as the concept of the “net delusion”. Beyond activism, though, AI and digital platforms also affect community planning and local participation. Social media has been used in urban planning in order to foster the involvement of communities in decision making, therefore allowing for these tools to democratise decision making and empowering communities to have a greater level of autonomy, particularly those of diverse and different communities that may have been excluded otherwise (Hollander et al., 2020, pg 511) In conclusion, in more recent years, AI and digital have significantly changed how people actively engage in their communities with both creating opportunities for people and ethical challenges because whilst people can use them to empower activism by amplifying voices and supporting goals like SDG 16 by promoting inclusion, these tools also bring up concerns about power the state have regrading surveillance of commmunties and bias that may form.
Maria Tewodros