The politics of artificial intelligence alignment: Public reactions to AI moderation in the case of Google’s Gemini

Abstract

This study tests how a prominent artificial intelligence (AI) product failure influences public attitudes, focusing on Google Gemini’s generation of controversial images. Drawing on the AI alignment literature, we distinguish three moderation goals that differ in how far they depart from data-driven outputs: safety, bias mitigation, and aspirational imaginaries. We use focusing events research to explain how controversies make governance questions salient. In a preregistered experiment with 1756 participants, we tested responses to two image sets: American Founding Fathers (T1) and German soldiers from 1943 (T2). T1 significantly reduced support for bias-related and aspirational moderation and lowered trust in the company, but did not affect safety-based justifications or perceived political alignment. T2 showed the same directional pattern but did not reach significance; pooled results confirmed the main pattern. These findings show that visible product failures can affect public views on AI governance along dimensions most directly implicated by the controversy.