Michele L. Jawando, a prominent figure at the intersection of technology, democracy, and economic opportunity, brings a unique blend of experience as a former Google executive, civil rights attorney, and CEO of the Omidyar Network to the complex discourse surrounding artificial intelligence. Her insights, particularly concerning AI’s impact on younger generations, offer a compelling counterpoint to the prevailing anxieties. Jawando, who also co-chairs Humanity AI, a coalition focused on shaping artificial intelligence, shared her perspective on fostering a more equitable and human-centric technological future, a vision she believes is not only possible but actively being built by a diverse coalition of stakeholders, including parents.

Jawando’s optimism is rooted in a firsthand understanding of technology’s evolution and its societal consequences. Having witnessed the profound, and at times detrimental, impact of the social media era on young people, she sees the current AI landscape as an opportunity for a course correction. "AI is not destiny," Jawando stated, emphasizing that the technology is a product of design choices. "It is designed. And we can design something better this time around – because we can remember the shocks. We’re still experiencing the shocks and the pain of social media. We can shift what we’re designing."

This perspective is informed by her tenure at Google, where she worked on accessibility initiatives with the National Federation for the Blind. This experience provided her with a deep understanding of the critical need for diverse voices and perspectives at the forefront of product development, particularly for those most vulnerable to technological oversights. Her early fascination with science fiction, particularly Star Trek, instilled in her a belief in technology’s potential to serve humanity, solve problems, and foster connection. "At its core, that was the thing technology was supposed to do," she explained. "Every great technological invention is somehow connected to: how can I be closer to other people? The railways, the phone, the early internet. And then what we did was we bastardized that. We changed the dynamic and we put it all toward profit and addiction and the worst impulses. And I firmly believe there’s a whole other way to do this."

The Shifting Landscape of Youth and AI

Recent data underscores the urgency of Jawando’s message. A Gallup study revealed a significant drop in Gen Z’s enthusiasm for AI, with excitement declining by 14 percentage points in a single year. Concurrently, feelings of hopefulness decreased by 9 percentage points, while anger increased by 9 percentage points. These statistics paint a picture of a generation grappling with the implications of AI, exhibiting a growing skepticism rather than embracing the technology. This trend is not unexpected for Jawando, who draws a parallel to the developmental trajectory of social media adoption.

However, Jawando highlights a crucial nuance within these otherwise concerning figures: 49 percent of Gen Zers still express curiosity about AI. She terms this the "curiosity gap," arguing it represents a vital opening for positive engagement. "The curiosity is actually grounded in critical thinking," she asserted. "What is happening, and does what I’m getting match what I actually want? They grew up as digital natives. They’ve seen the effects of social media across their entire childhood. So they’re more discerning now. They’re not disinterested – they want something better." This discerning curiosity, she suggests, is a powerful indicator that young people are not simply accepting technology at face value but are actively questioning its purpose and impact.

The Parental Imperative in AI Design and Regulation

Jawando places significant emphasis on the role of parents in shaping the future of AI. Her own experience as a mother of four, navigating the complexities of technology within an intergenerational household, informs her advocacy. She believes parents possess an unparalleled motivation to ensure technology serves their children’s well-being. "The only person I would never bet against is a parent," she declared. "Because parents will go to the mat and we will fight with everything that we have for our children."

This parental drive is already influencing policy and product development. Over 25 states have introduced AI-related legislation, reflecting a growing awareness of the need for regulatory frameworks. Jawando notes the formation of unlikely alliances – including religious institutions, parent groups, senior citizens, and young people themselves – all converging to advocate for responsible AI. Her organization supports teenagers who are actively developing new social applications, driven by a desire for alternatives to the digital environments they have inherited.

This grassroots movement, powered by parental concern and proactive engagement, is accelerating the pace of AI regulation compared to the slower evolution of social media oversight. "It was parents who made the biggest breakthrough in understanding what happened," Jawando observed. "We were seeing it. We were experiencing it. We saw our kids, and we were like: what is happening here." This "muscle memory" of parental advocacy, she believes, is now being activated earlier in the AI development cycle.

Navigating the "Shortcut Problem" and Fostering Genuine Intelligence

A significant concern for parents and educators is the potential for AI to become a crutch, enabling students to outsource their thinking rather than develop critical cognitive skills. Jawando addresses this "shortcut problem" by reframing the issue. She points out the inherent contradiction in messages children receive: "Screen time bad. Don’t use the technology. But also, here’s an AI tool for your classroom. The messages are completely disconnected. And we’re surprised when they game it."

The deeper challenge, according to Jawando, lies in educational systems that still prioritize rote memorization and easily quantifiable answers, areas where AI excels. "The deeper problem, she thinks, is that we’re still asking questions AI can just answer," she stated. "When was the Gettysburg Address? AI knows. What’s underneath it – the tensions, the stakes, what it means right now, what question nobody has thought to ask yet – that’s where actual thinking lives. That’s what we should be asking for. And if we’re not asking for it, we can’t be shocked that kids aren’t offering it."

Beyond curriculum reform, Jawando advocates for a fundamental shift in how we perceive and nurture individual intelligence. She emphasizes the importance of making space for a child’s unique wisdom, including their uncertainties and mistakes. "We think we too often skip over our children’s individual wisdom," she said. "We don’t make space for the question – for the thing they don’t know yet, for the mistake, for the moment of not-getting-it. Because they worry somebody will say they’re not smart, or they don’t understand. So how do we create spaces again for the humanness?"

This goes beyond the oft-repeated adage that "AI can’t replace human creativity." Jawando’s argument is more profound: the current moment compels us to ask what is uniquely human. "This moment is forcing all of us to ask: what is human right now? What is unique and special? And what is the story that only you can tell?" she posited. The goal, therefore, is not to replace human capabilities with AI, but to "use technology to augment those things – not replace them."

The Duality of Technology: Accommodation and Vulnerability

Jawando’s personal experiences offer compelling illustrations of AI’s dual nature. She shares how her autistic daughter found a vital community and sense of belonging within online platforms like Roblox, where she could connect with other neurodiverse individuals in a less socially demanding environment. This exemplifies technology’s potential as a genuine accommodation, fostering inclusion and connection. "I get to see this through their eyes," she said, "and then I get to work on it at home and at work."

Conversely, her mother has been a victim of online scams, requiring Jawando’s expertise as a civil rights attorney to navigate the aftermath. This stark contrast – the same technology that provides community for one child can jeopardize the financial security of another – highlights the critical question of design and decision-making. "The question is never whether technology is good or bad," Jawando concluded. "The question is always: who is it designed for, and who gets to decide."

A Call for Depth and Authentic Identity

The prevailing culture of social media, characterized by curated highlight reels and the performance of an idealized self, has, for many, led to a superficial engagement with life and identity. Jawando’s vision for AI offers a potential antidote, a pathway back to depth and authentic selfhood. The prospect of a future where technology encourages introspection and the exploration of individual identity, rather than promoting a curated persona, is deeply resonant.

"I love that," Jawando responded with warmth when presented with this sentiment. "And that is why I want to design a better future than the one we’ve been given. That is what I am waking up every day fighting for. For my kids." Her unwavering commitment, fueled by the fierce protectiveness of parenthood, underscores the power of collective action. "And the only person I would never bet against is a parent," she reiterated. "Because parents will go to the mat. People cannot understand that. I thought I was good before – and then I became a mom. I would take you out."

This dedication from parents, coupled with the growing awareness of AI’s design implications, suggests a pivotal moment. As Jawando articulates, the challenge is not to halt technological advancement but to consciously and collaboratively steer it towards outcomes that prioritize human well-being, critical thinking, and the unique value of individual identity. The future of AI, she argues, rests on our collective ability to design not just for efficiency or profit, but for empathy, equity, and genuine human connection.