Phases of discourse on AI regulation in the United Kingdom, 2013–25

Towards a cultural materialist analysis of ‘AI’ and ‘regulation’

Bibliographic Data

ID19489486
AuthorsLeighton Andrews (0000-0001-9166-0116, Cardiff University, corresponding author)
Year2026
Volume17
Issue1
Pages35-54
Publication date2026-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Digital Media & Policy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2516-3523 • E-ISSN: 2516-3531
PublisherIntellect (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1386/jdmp_00197_1
OpenAlexW7161292926
LanguageEN
References cited10

AI has a material presence in our world in different forms, but is often interpreted in media and industry commentary as though it were a singular almost magical entity incapable of being grasped by regulatory structures. Similarly, regulation is treated both as the opposite of or as an inhibitor of innovation, almost as a static and unbending text, rather than a social construct, subject to debate and challenge, struggle and resistance. These simplistic representations are subject to and reinforced by the discursive power of ‘Big Tech’ companies. Instead, we need a more material understanding of AI, and a more fluid understanding of regulation and the social and cultural processes underpinning it, recognizing that AI is already subject to regulation. This article examines four different phases of approaches to regulation of AI in the United Kingdom, a legislature where there has been considerable discussion of regulatory approaches and needs over time, as well as an active focus on the promotion of initiatives to support technological development, including in AI. Instead of a binary debate between regulation and innovation, there is a need for a nuanced approach which considers AI and its regulation in a wider material context

Legislature · Materialism · Underpinning · Digital Economy and Work Transformation · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Regulation and Compliance Studies

Tools

Open DOI