elizaonsteroids logo

Critique of the FH Kiel Paper: Discourse Management Instead of Enlightenment

A revealing analysis of the FH Kiel publication from the perspective of elizaonsteroids.org – focusing on definitional power, statistical illusions, and structural control of communication.

📘 “What Can Be Done About Hate Speech and Fake News?”
A paper from FH Kiel attempts to provide answers – but mainly delivers one thing: the controlled opposite of enlightenment.


🧩 The Content, Disenchanted

This 161-page document addresses topics like deepfakes, social bots, and platform responsibility – but it remains superficial and avoids critical questions:

  • Who constructs terms like “hate speech”?
  • Why is trust in official narratives eroding?
  • What role does language play in structurally controlled communication?

Instead, it is dominated by:

  • Blind faith in technology and state authority
  • Illusions of solution via “media literacy” training
  • Systematic avoidance of the power question

➡️ A bloated document that simulates complexity in order to evade systemic critique. Length becomes a rhetorical shield.


🧠 Three Fundamental Fallacies

1. Uncritical Adoption of Definitions

Terms like “hate” and “disinformation” are treated as objective.
The core question remains unasked: Who defines – and for what purpose?

2. Technology Instead of Root Cause Analysis

Bots, AI, platform rules – all distractions from the real question:
What does it say about society that these phenomena arise at all?

3. The Illusion of Statistical Control

The paper misunderstands how systems like ChatGPT actually work:

  • Texts are generated probabilistically, not through understanding
  • The result is a simulation of dialogue – not real conversation

➡️ We call it:
🎭 ELIZA on steroids – a controlled, statistical simulation of conversation.
More at elizaonsteroids.org


🔍 Page-by-Page Deconstruction

Pages 6–22 (Preface & Introduction)

  • No reflection on political interests behind the “hate speech” discourse
  • Technocratic focus with no social depth

Pages 23–109 (Part I – Perspectives)

  • Chapters 2–5: Pure symptom treatment (hate, bots, fake news)
  • Chapter 6: Uncritical praise for the EU Code of Practice (voluntary corporate regulation)
  • Chapters 7–8: Deepfakes as a threat – but no media criticism

Pages 111–161 (Part II – Action Space)

  • Chapters 9–10: Platform responsibility without a freedom-of-speech debate
  • Chapter 11: Ironically calls AI a “truth authority”
  • Chapters 12–13: Media literacy = soft indoctrination

🧘‍♂️ What’s Missing? The Human – and the Truth About Communication

The central failure:
“Hate speech” is treated as a management problem – not as a mirror of an increasingly voiceless society.

➡️ No self-reflection. No power critique. No empathy.


🔗 Conclusion

This paper…

  • reassures institutions (“We’re doing something!”)
  • describes what’s visible
  • obscures what’s structural

📎 Original PDF (FH Kiel)