A global AI list with a northern accent

TIME sells its AI power list as global, but it mostly reflects the priorities and power structures of a handful of rich countries.

Article link: https://open.substack.com/pub/johanosteyn/p/a-global-ai-list-with-a-northern?r=73gqa&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

Audio summary: https://youtu.be/3Xf7EVGm-vs

Follow me on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/johanosteyn/

I write about various issues of interest to me that I want to bring to the reader’s attention. While my main work is in Artificial Intelligence and technology, I also cover areas around politics, education, and the future of our children.

When TIME Magazine recently published its TIME100 AI list, it was doing more than celebrating personalities. It is drawing a map of who matters in the emerging AI world: whose judgment counts, whose fears get airtime, and whose interests will quietly shape the systems our children grow up with. The list is presented as a global snapshot of influence.

To be fair, there are important people from Africa and the broader developing world on it: ministers from Rwanda and Nigeria, entrepreneurs from Zimbabwe and Brazil, researchers from South Africa, India and Mexico. Their work is real, and their inclusion is welcome. But the centre of gravity is unmistakable. The overwhelming majority of names still sit in the so-called Global North – the United States, parts of Europe and a few wealthy Asian states. That imbalance is not just a diversity issue; it is a power problem.

CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND

The skew in the list mirrors the structure of the AI industry itself. The biggest models are trained in a handful of well-funded labs. The most powerful chips are designed and manufactured by a small group of companies. The largest data centres sit in a few rich countries. Unsurprisingly, the executives, researchers and regulators around these centres of capital and compute dominate any ranking of “influential voices”. TIME is quite candid that its list is a map of power, not a catalogue of every talented person working in the field.

At the same time, the Global South is often positioned as a consumer rather than a co-author. Africa is framed as a market for AI-driven services, a source of data and cheap labour for content labelling, or a promising future growth story. Latin America and much of Asia are treated similarly. There are exceptions – and the African and developing-world leaders on the TIME list are a sign that our region is not invisible – but the basic pattern remains: the centre of decision-making sits elsewhere.

INSIGHT AND ANALYSIS

Why does this matter? First, because the people who are treated as the “voices of AI” help decide what counts as an important problem. If most of them live and work in the Global North, the conversation naturally centres around their realities: competition between big labs, national security, corporate market share, and the impact of AI on highly paid knowledge workers in rich economies. Those issues do matter. But they are not the only, or even the primary, concerns in places like South Africa.

In our context, the questions often look very different. What will AI do to call-centre jobs in Johannesburg and Durban? How will automated decision-making affect access to credit, healthcare or social grants in already unequal societies? How do we protect children in under-resourced schools from increasingly sophisticated online harm and disinformation? How do we build digital infrastructure in countries where electricity and connectivity remain fragile?

These are not side notes; they are central to how AI will be experienced by hundreds of millions of people. Yet they rarely shape the main narrative when the loudest microphones are in Silicon Valley, Brussels and a few Gulf capitals.

There is also a bigger, structural risk. When lists like TIME100 AI tell the world that the key actors in AI are almost all based in the same small group of rich countries and corporations, they reinforce a kind of digital colonialism. Data from the Global South flows northwards. Profits and intellectual property flow back the same way. Our local experts appear as case studies, not as peers, helping to set the rules. Even the well-deserved presence of African and developing-world leaders on the list can, unintentionally, create a sense that a handful of honoured individuals are sufficient representation for billions of people.

IMPLICATIONS

For South Africa, Africa and the wider developing world, this should be a wake-up call. If we are not present where agendas are set, standards are written, and treaties are negotiated, we will end up living under rules we did not design. That is as true for AI as it was for trade, finance and climate agreements. Being mentioned in global rankings feels good, but it is not the same as having a real, institutional voice.

The response cannot simply be to complain about bias in international media. We need to build our own centres of gravity. That means investing in African universities, research institutes and startups working on AI for African problems. It means regulators who understand both the technology and the realities of our societies, and who can stand their ground in international negotiations. It means supporting civil society organisations, teachers, youth leaders and trade unions to engage meaningfully with AI policy, rather than leaving it to a narrow technical elite. Recognition from TIME is a start; sustained capacity and coalition-building are what turn visibility into influence.

CLOSING TAKEAWAY

A global list with a northern accent tells us something important about the world we are building. It shows that, for now, the people who shape AI’s direction are still clustered in a few powerful countries, even as the technology reaches deep into every classroom, clinic and workplace on the planet. The presence of African and developing-world names on the list is encouraging and should be celebrated. But we should not let that small measure of inclusion distract us from the larger imbalance.

If AI is to serve all of humanity, then humanity in all its regions must help decide what it becomes. That includes South Africa and the Global South, not as grateful audience members, but as co-authors of the story our children will inherit.

Author Bio: Johan Steyn is a prominent AI thought leader, speaker, and author with a deep understanding of artificial intelligence’s impact on business and society. He is passionate about ethical AI development and its role in shaping a better future. Find out more about Johan’s work at https://www.aiforbusiness.net