AI could fuel social polarization for 50 years, says futurist

Tomorrow, Today published an interview with futurist Jorge Brown, who argues that artificial intelligence could deepen social polarization for the next 50 years. Brown shared his predictions on how AI might shape society and business over the long term.

Why it matters

Brown’s warning comes as businesses and regulators are already debating the social consequences of AI. He claims that AI could reinforce existing divisions, not just for a few years but for 50. Most AI commentary focuses on immediate risks or benefits, so Brown’s long timeline stands out.

For companies, this means AI is likely to shape public trust, employee relations, and regulatory attention for decades. Recent moves like Pennsylvania’s law on AI-generated ads show that lawmakers are already responding to concerns about how AI affects public debate. Brown’s argument suggests that these pressures will not fade quickly.

How Brown sees AI and polarization interacting

According to Brown, AI systems automate and personalize information in ways that can reinforce social bubbles and filter out opposing views. He points to the way algorithms already shape what people see online, and says future AI will make these effects stronger and more persistent. Brown’s 50-year prediction assumes that AI will keep evolving along current lines, with few effective interventions to reduce bias or fragmentation.

Brown also says that as AI tools become more embedded in areas like advertising and hiring, their influence will go beyond social media. He argues that companies using AI will have to deal with accusations of bias, even when using third-party products. Brown describes this as a structural challenge, not just a matter of bad actors or isolated mistakes. His view echoes concerns from some regulators and industry groups about trust in institutions being undermined by unchecked AI.

What this means if you run a business

If Brown is correct, business leaders should expect polarization and public debate over AI to be a permanent part of their environment. This is not a passing controversy. Companies could face reputational risks if their use of AI is seen as amplifying bias or misinformation. Even firms that do not build AI themselves may need to explain how their vendors’ tools work and address fairness concerns.

Practical steps could include regular audits of AI-driven processes for unintentional bias, clearer disclosures to customers, and preparing for a patchwork of state or national regulations. Pennsylvania, for example, now requires AI-generated political ads to carry clear labels. Brown’s long timeline suggests that polarization linked to AI will not fade as the technology matures. Building trust and showing responsible use may become a permanent part of running a company.

Brown’s perspective is unusual, but for operators, the message is direct: AI decisions carry social consequences that may last much longer than a single product cycle.