Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Why are Black women becoming the hidden figures in AI?

Opinion

Katherine Johnson receives the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama presents Katherine Johnson with the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2015. She would not become widely recognized until the release of "Hidden Figures" in 2016, decades after she made groundbreaking contributions to the space program.


Kris Connor/WireImage

Turner Lee is a senior fellow and the director of the Center for Technology Innovation at the Brookings Institution. She has created a new AI Equity Lab at Brookings to interrogate civil and human rights compliance within emerging models.

The White House recently issued an executive order to ensure the safety, security and equity of artificial intelligence technologies in the United States and abroad. This call to action was reaffirmed when Vice President Kamala Harris spoke at the AI Safety Summit in the United Kingdom and she emphasized the need for expanded oversight, and possible AI regulation over machines and models that result in adverse consequences.

For decades, an increasing number of experts, including other Black women in AI, have generated research and policy recommendations around necessary civil and human rights protections, improved data quality, and the lawful compliance of AI and other emerging technologies. While the bold prominence of the vice president at the summit set the stage for more diverse voices, Black women are largely being excluded from these and other high-profile dialogues, which disadvantages any conversations on the design and deployment of more equitable AI.


Black women have led in AI policymaking before its growing popularity and interest. In 2019, Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) issued the first version of the Algorithmic Accountability Act with her colleagues to interrogate automated decisions driving housing, creditworthiness and hiring outcomes. In the same year, and after her former Speaker Nancy Pelosi was the subject of altered videos, Clarke also introduced the first version of her DEEPFAKES Accountability Act, which would go after video creators who falsified video content and contributed to disinformation, especially around the time of the 2020 election.

After presenting revised updates to her proposed legislation every year following, Clarke’s 2023 versions of both are up again for House consideration. Other Black women in policy like former White House official Alondra Nelson led the development of the first ever national Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights in 2022 that pushed the country closer to more equitable AI.

The indelible marks made by these women have not gone unnoticed. But they are joined by an increasing number of other Black women in AI, whose work includes formidable research and pragmatic policy proposals that bring lived experiences to AI design, deployment and oversight. Despite impressive backgrounds as computer and data scientists, criminologists, sociologists, curators, policy professionals, tech entrepreneurs, and social activists, many of these women are not prominently appearing in highly visible roles and conversations or being asked by policymakers to bring their findings to congressional hearings focused on AI regulation, technical cadences, or harms to consumers and democracy.

Between March 8 and Nov. 29, Congress held various hearings on AI that covered topics relating the workforce to AI’s role in modern communications. Black women were sparsely presented as witnesses to testify on the subject. Of the 125 witnesses who participated in the 32 hearings, only two were Black women, one of whom was me. Until recently, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has worked to increase the number of Black women participating in his recurring AI Insight Forum s, which will undeniably influence the direction of national AI self-regulatory policies, and more prescriptive regulation.

The reality is that when Black women’s voices are amplified, it is usually to discredit their contributions and achievements. AI pioneer Timnit Gebru, a former Google researcher, was terminated after announcing the company was silencing marginalized voices. Algorithmic justice advocate and bestselling author Joy Buolamwini exposed the racial inequities embedded in the design and use of facial recognition technology by government agencies. Yet, law enforcement continues to use it with little regard for the false arrests of Black people due to its technical misidentifications around skin color.

When Black women are not being attacked for their similarly poised expertise, they are relegated to the status of being hidden figures in science and technology – where they are more of an afterthought. In 2016, the world came to know the late Katherine Johnson, a retired NASA scientist and mathematician in orbital mechanics, through a bestselling book and movie both titled “Hidden Figures.” At the age of 96, Johnson’s expertise was finally recognized, especially her work on many critical space missions in her decades-long career, including the aversion of the near-fatal collision of the Apollo mission. Four years after we learned about her significant role in the country’s space programs, she died at the age of 102.

Black women in AI should not be attacked or become hidden figures where their ideas and concepts are invoked by others in privileged conversations and rooms.

If future AI is going to be responsibly designed and deployed, Black women must be included to stop and control how these technologies further racialize or criminalize certain communities. Their participation can motivate more inclusive design and products in AI that better serve and involve the public. As more corporations are dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion programs that will erode Black women’s visibility in board rooms, and other prominent leadership roles, this call for participation and input are both critical and timely.

Right now, it feels like Black women, whose thought leadership comes packaged in so many disciplines and work streams are largely invisible despite their established expertise. If the federal government, and the companies at the forefront of AI development, desire to achieve the goals of safety, equity and fairness in AI, then it must see and include Black women on Capitol Hill, in university research labs, in civil society organizations and think tanks, as well as in industry war rooms and boardrooms. We must not be memorialized later as hidden figures for the decisions that ultimately got made today about the governance, development and deployment of more ubiquitous AI.


Read More

Man lying in his bed, on his phone at night.

As the 2026 election approaches, doomscrolling and social media are shaping voter behavior through fear and anxiety. Learn how digital news consumption influences political decisions—and how to break the cycle for more informed voting.

Getty Images, gorodenkoff

Americans Are Doomscrolling Their Way to the Ballot Box and Only Getting Empty Promises

As the spring primary cycle ramps up, voters are deciding which candidates to elect in the November general election, but too much doomscrolling on social media is leading to uninformed — and often anxiety-based — voting. Even though online platforms and politicians may be preying on our exhaustion to further their agendas, we don’t have to fall for it this election cycle.

Doomscrolling is, unfortunately, part of daily life for many of us. It involves consuming a virtually endless amount of negative social media posts and news content, causing us to feel scared and depressed. Our brains have a hardwired negativity bias that causes us to notice potential threats and focus on them. This is exacerbated by the fact that people who closely follow or participate in politics are more likely to doomscroll.

Keep ReadingShow less
The robot arm is assembling the word AI, Artificial Intelligence. 3D illustration

AI has the potential to transform education, mental health, and accessibility—but only if society actively shapes its use. Explore how community-driven norms, better data, and open experimentation can unlock better AI.

Getty Images, sarawuth702

Build Better AI

Something I think just about all of us agree on: we want better AI. Regardless of your current perspective on AI, it's undeniable that, like any other tool, it can unleash human flourishing. There's progress to be made with AI that we should all applaud and aim to make happen as soon as possible.

There are kids in rural communities who stand to benefit from AI tutors. There are visually impaired individuals who can more easily navigate the world with AI wearables. There are folks struggling with mental health issues who lack access to therapists who are in need of guidance during trying moments. A key barrier to leveraging AI "for good" is our imagination—because in many domains, we've become accustomed to an unacceptable status quo. That's the real comparison. The alternative to AI isn't well-functioning systems that are efficiently and effectively operating for everyone.

Keep ReadingShow less
Government Cyber Security Breach

An urgent look at the risks of unregulated artificial intelligence—from job loss and environmental strain to national security threats—and the growing political battle to regulate AI in the United States.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

AI Has Put Humanity on the Ballot

AI may not be the only existential threat out there, but it is coming for us the fastest. When I started law school in 2022, AI could barely handle basic math, but by graduation, it could pass the bar exam. Instead of taking the bar myself, I rolled immediately into a Master of Laws in Global Business Law at Columbia, where I took classes like Regulation of the Digital Economy and Applied AI in Legal Practice. By the end of the program, managing partners were comparing using AI to working with a team of associates; the CEO of Anthropic is now warning that it will be more capable than everyone in less than two years.

AI is dangerous in ways we are just beginning to see. Data centers that power AI require vast amounts of water to keep the servers cool, but two-thirds are in places already facing high water stress, with researchers estimating that water needs could grow from 60 billion liters in 2022 to as high as 275 billion liters by 2028. By then, data centers’ share of U.S. electricity consumption could nearly triple.

Keep ReadingShow less
Posters are displayed next to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as he speaks at a news conference to unveil the Take It Down Act to protect victims against non-consensual intimate image abuse, on Capitol Hill on June 18, 2024 in Washington, DC.

A lawsuit against xAI over AI-generated deepfakes targeting teenage girls exposes a growing crisis in schools. As laws struggle to keep up, this story explores AI accountability, teen safety, and what educators and parents must do now.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

Deepfakes: The New Face of Cyberbullying and Why Parents, Schools, and Lawmakers Must Act

As a former teacher who worked in a high school when Snapchat was born, I witnessed the birth of sexting and its impact on teens. I recall asking a parent whether he was checking his daughter’s phone for inappropriate messages. His response was, “sometimes you just don’t want to know.” But the federal lawsuit filed last week against Elon Musk's xAI has put a national spotlight on AI-generated deepfakes and the teenage girls they target. Parents and teachers can’t ignore the crisis inside our schools.

AI Companies Built the Tool. The Grok Lawsuit Says They Own the Damage.

Whether the theory of French prosecutors–that Elon Musk deliberately allowed the sexualized image controversy to grow so that it would drive up activity on the platform and boost the company’s valuation–is true or not, when a company makes the decision to build a tool and knows that it can be weaponized but chooses to release it anyway, they are making a risk-based decision believing that they can act without consequence. The Grok lawsuit could make these types of business decisions much more costly.

Keep ReadingShow less