Peluang dan Tantangan Jurnalisme Multiplatform di Era Teknologi Kecerdasan Buatan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71029/bayyin.v4i1.158Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Systematic Literature Review, Multiplatform, JurnalismeAbstract
Pemanfaatan Kecerdasan Buatan (Artificial Intelligence atau AI) telah merambah berbagai aspek kehidupan dewasa ini, termasuk dalam ranah jurnalisme multiplatform. Penelitian ini menyoroti kontroversi seputar penggunaan AI dalam konteks jurnalisme multiplatform, dengan fokus pada aspek positif dan negatif yang telah diuraikan. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mengidentifikasi peluang dan tantangan yang dihadapi jurnalisme multiplatform di era teknologi AI. Dengan menggunakan metode Systematic Literature Review, penelitian ini meninjau literatur terkait yang terdapat dalam indeks Scopus. Hasilnya, empat publikasi ilmiah dijadikan data penelitian. Dalam menghadapi era teknologi AI, jurnalisme multiplatform dianggap mampu meraih manfaat dari kehadiran AI dalam memperkaya dan memberi nilai tambah pada karya jurnalistik. Namun, terdapat kekhawatiran terkait kesiapan audiensi dan sumber daya internal lembaga jurnalisme, serta potensi penguatan disinformasi oleh AI. Penelitian ini dapat menjadi landasan awal bagi penelitian mendatang yang ingin menggali lebih dalam fenomena jurnalisme multiplatform dan AI, dengan menambah nilai dengan kajian langsung pada pelaku, pengamat, dan pengelola media multiplatform.
Downloads
References
Barnett, P., & Lascar, C. (2012). Comparing Unique Title Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 70. https://doi.org/10.29173/istl1558
Barriuso, A. L., de La Prieta, F., Murciego, Á. L., Hernández, D., & Herrero, J. R. (2016). An Intelligent Agent-Based Journalism Platform (pp. 322–332). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39387-2_27
Chalmers, I. (2003). Trying to do more Good than Harm in Policy and Practice: The Role of Rigorous, Transparent, Up-to-Date Evaluations. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 589(1), 22–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716203254762
Copeland, B. J. (2004). The essential turing. Clarendon Press.
Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22(2), 338–342. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF
Frank, M. (2023). US Leadership in Artificial Intelligence Can Shape the 21st Century Global Order. The Diplomat.
Kitchenham, B. A., Pearl Brereton, O., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., & Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 51(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009
Leibowicz, C. R., McGregor, S., & Ovadya, A. (2021). The Deepfake Detection Dilemma. Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 736–744. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461702.3462584
Li, J., Burnham, J. F., Lemley, T., & Britton, R. M. (2010). Citation Analysis: Comparison of Web of Science®, ScopusTM, SciFinder®, and Google Scholar. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 7(3), 196–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/15424065.2010.505518
McCorduck, P., & Cfe, C. (2004). Machines Who Think. A K Peters/CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429258985
Meho, L. I., & Rogers, Y. (2008). Citation counting, citation ranking, and h -index of human-computer interaction researchers: A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1711–1726. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20874
Middleton, S. E., Papadopoulos, S., & Kompatsiaris, Y. (2018). Social Computing for Verifying Social Media Content in Breaking News. IEEE Internet Computing, 22(2), 83–89. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2018.112102235
Mondal, K. (2016). Different Visualization Issues with Big Data (pp. 555–562). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30927-9_55
Mulrow, C. D. (1994). Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ, 309(6954), 597–599. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.309.6954.597
Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2007). Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature. Journal of Informetrics, 1(2), 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2006.12.001
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (Eds.). (2006). Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754887
Rainie, L., Keeter, S., & Perrin, A. (2019). Americans’ Trust in Government, Each Other, Leaders |. Pew Research Center.
Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, Global Edition. Pearson Education.
Sørensen, I. E. (2014). Channels as content curators: Multiplatform strategies for documentary film and factual content in British public service broadcasting. European Journal of Communication, 29(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323113504856
Sun, M., Urquía-Grande, E., Chamizo-González, J., & Campo, C. del. (2022). Accounting Earnings and Economic Growth, Trends, and Challenges: A Bibliometric Approach. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7352160
Webster, D., & Celik, O. (2014). Systematic review of Kinect applications in elderly care and stroke rehabilitation. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 11(1), 108. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-108
Williams, R. (2023). Humans may be more likely to believe disinformation generated by AI |. MIT Technology Review.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Donny Dharmawan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
