A reflection on why Thai relational culture must evolve new norms around responsible caring in an age when misinformation can be produced to sound trustworthy.
Many messages are shared because someone cares. A warning about health is sent to the family group. News about a possible danger is forwarded to colleagues. An investment opportunity is shared with friends before they miss it. The intention is often protective: "I saw this and thought you should know."
This is an important part of relational life in Thailand. Information does not move only through institutions — it moves through people who feel responsible for those around them. But care can make information travel faster than verification. The sender may not be trying to mislead anyone. They may believe that withholding a warning is more dangerous than forwarding something that has not yet been confirmed. The cost of being wrong feels distant. The cost of failing to warn someone we love feels immediate.
Artificial intelligence intensifies this behaviour. False or misleading information can now be produced in language that appears professional, accompanied by realistic images, convincing voice recordings, or fabricated explanations. The familiar cues people once used to assess credibility are becoming less reliable. A message may look official without coming from an institution. A video may feel emotionally authentic without depicting an event that occurred. A detailed explanation may contain no obvious spelling or grammatical errors because it was generated to sound trustworthy.
This creates a cultural challenge that cannot be solved only through technical fact-checking. People forward information partly because of the relationship with the recipient. The act says: "You matter enough for me to warn you." Simply telling people not to share unverified information may therefore fail — it treats the behaviour as carelessness while ignoring the social obligation beneath it.
The better question is: how can we preserve the desire to care while changing the behaviour through which care is expressed?
My earlier research argued that culture influences information-related behaviour and that technology-mediated environments must accommodate the lived expectations of their members. Applied to the AI era, digital literacy in Thailand should not focus only on identifying false information — it should create new social norms around responsible caring.
Before forwarding, we might ask: Is the source identifiable? Can this information cause unnecessary fear? Would I be willing to correct it publicly if it proves false? Can I send the verified source rather than the dramatic summary? Could I express concern without claiming certainty?
Families, companies and public agencies can help by making reliable information easy to share in the same spaces where rumours circulate. A hospital should not assume citizens will visit its website — it may need to provide clear, shareable messages designed for family chats. A company should not communicate only through formal announcements if employees receive most urgent information through informal groups. AI can also support verification, but it should communicate uncertainty honestly.
The intelligent age will test whether our social relationships strengthen truth or accelerate anxiety. Thai relational culture contains a powerful asset: people feel responsible for one another. The challenge is to ensure that responsibility includes not only passing information along, but also protecting others from the consequences of information we have not taken time to examine.
In the intelligent age, caring for someone may mean not only sharing what could help them — but pausing before sharing what could unnecessarily frighten or mislead them.