PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 2, 20262 citationsOpen Access

The Generative AI Paradox: GenAI and the Erosion of Trust, the Corrosion of Information Verification, and the Demise of Truth

View Full Paper
EFEmilio Ferrara

Key Points

  • The aim is to understand how GenAI affects trust and information verification in society.
  • Formalizes synthetic reality as a layered stack
  • Expands taxonomy of GenAI harms
  • Analyzes sociotechnical shifts related to GenAI
  • Proposes a mitigation stack for societal resilience
  • Synthetic content and interaction lead to trust erosion and verification challenges.
  • Documented risks manifest in fraud, elections, and harassment.
  • Synthetic realities create gaps in provenance and hinder information verification.

Abstract

Generative AI (GenAI) now produces text, images, audio, and video that can be perceptually convincing at scale and at negligible marginal cost. While public debate often frames the associated harms as “deepfakes” or incremental extensions of misinformation and fraud, this view misses a broader socio-technical shift: GenAI enables synthetic realities—coherent, interactive, and potentially personalized information environments in which content, identity, and social interaction are jointly manufactured and mutually reinforcing. We argue that the most consequential risk is not merely the production of isolated synthetic artifacts, but the progressive erosion of shared epistemic ground and institutional verification practices as synthetic content, synthetic identity, and synthetic interaction become easy to generate and hard to audit. This paper (i) formalizes synthetic reality as a layered stack (content, identity, interaction, institutions), (ii) expands a taxonomy of GenAI harms spanning personal, economic, informational, and socio-technical risks, (iii) articulates the qualitative shifts introduced by GenAI (cost collapse, throughput, customization, micro-segmentation, provenance gaps, and trust erosion), and (iv) synthesizes recent risk realizations (2023–2025) into a compact case bank illustrating how these mechanisms manifest in fraud, elections, harassment, documentation, and supply-chain compromise. We then propose a mitigation stack that treats provenance infrastructure, platform governance, institutional workflow redesign, and public resilience as complementary rather than substitutable, and outline a research agenda focused on measuring epistemic security. We conclude with the Generative AI Paradox: as synthetic media becomes ubiquitous, societies may rationally discount digital evidence altogether, raising the cost of truth for everyday life and for democratic and economic institutions.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Emilio Ferrara (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6980ffd6c1c9540dea812ac2https://doi.org/10.3390/fi18020073
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Synthetic Reality: Generative Artificial Intelligence, Hyperreality, and the Collapse of Digital Trust in AI-Mediated Society2026
  2. 2Propagation of AI-Generated Misinformation and the Ethical Imperatives for Artificial Intelligence Research: A Critical Synthesis2026
  3. 3The Genetic Fallacy at Scale2026
  4. 4Ethical Challenges and Solutions of Generative AI: An Interdisciplinary Perspective2024 · 304 citations
  5. 5The Authenticity Challenge2026