s supported by [29], accountability ensures that or-ganizations take ownership of the outcomes generated by AIsystems, thereby enhancing public confidence in these tech-nologies.
Accountability doesn't necessarily ensure that organizations will take ownership of their AI-generated outcomes. It's a bit of a stretch to say it ensures that, I think it would be better if he said 'encourages'. A better argument would be establishing an AI ethical code of conduct.
cross social media has a significant positive effect on AIfairness.H2: The use of AI in creating digital marketing contentacross social media has a significant positive effect on AIaccountability.H3: AI accountability has a significant positive effect on AIfairness.
This constant use of the term 'fairness', I find a bit repetitive. In marketing 'fairness' could mean equal exposure to ads, non-discrimination in data use, or honest representation. Without clarification, readers can interpret the phrase in conflicting ways, weakening the argument’s precision.
These factors mediate consumer perceptions of fairness andaccountability, enriching the discourse on AI ethics in cul-turally distinct regions.
I think this is somewhat the opposite of what the text says later. While AI can have "discriminatory" patterns, it can also be used as a tool for fairness. The author should reconcile them by emphasizing that fairness depends on algorithm transparency and unbiased data input rather than implying AI is simultaneously both fair and unfair.
Fairness in AI, defined as the elimination of avoidable bi-ases among groups, is equally important. Training data oftenreflects societal preyudices, which can inadvertently propagatethrough AI algorithms [12]. This raises the risk of discrimi-natory practices in marketing, where targeted content mightreinforce stereotypes or exclude specific demographics.
This, to me seems like an appeal to fear fallacy because it's dramatizing a future outcome implying consequences without specific, causal evidence. The concern of there being discriminatory practices in marketing through AI is legitimate but relies too heavily on emotional impact rather than one event leading to another.
The “black box” natureof AI, where users cannot fully comprehend how decisions aremade, presents challenges in ensuring transparency and ac-countability [30].
This statement is both reasonable and factually grounded, as transparency and accountability are widely recognized issues in AI ethics. The premise is sound, but the author could strengthen it by providing empirical examples — for instance, known cases where opaque algorithms led to marketing biases or misinformation.
Artificial intelligence (AI) has become integral tool inmodern marketing, offering capabilities like predictive ana-lytics, customer segmentation, and personalized content de-livery
I agree with this statement, and its a sound and valid argument. I like how it connects AI's predictive capabilities to its marketing usefulness. That's why people say AI is the future, because it has so many applications.