TL;DR:
- G/O media, the digital publisher behind popular sites like Gizmodo, faced backlash for publishing AI-generated stories without input from editors or writers.
- G/O executives plan to create more AI-generated content, while most conventional publishers are cautious about producing fully machine-generated content.
- AI-written stories could potentially replace human journalists or be used for low-value content, while journalists focus on more engaging work.
- Internal memos reveal plans for AI-generated content summaries on platforms like Jalopnik and the AV Club.
- G/O employees express concerns about errors and lack of editorial oversight in AI-generated stories.
- G/O leadership assures collaboration with top editors in future AI projects and emphasizes that AI will augment, not replace, their staff.
- Other newsrooms have scaled back their use of AI-generated content due to errors and limitations.
- Machine-made content offers cost advantages but lacks long-term value for publications.
- Google’s search rankings have fluctuated for AI-generated content, affecting visibility.
- AI-generated content presents both opportunities and challenges for the media industry’s future.
Main AI News:
In recent times, G/O media, the digital publisher behind popular sites like Gizmodo, the Onion, and Jezebel, caused quite a stir when it released four stories that were primarily generated by AI engines. These machine-written articles, plagued with numerous errors and published without any input from G/O’s editors or writers, triggered a wave of outrage among G/O staff and media circles at large.
However, G/O executives have made it clear that they intend to continue exploring the potential of AI-generated stories as part of their ongoing technological experiment. In fact, an internal memo reveals their plans to produce more machine-written content in the near future, with G/O’s editorial director, Merrill Brown, expressing enthusiasm for expanding this practice.
G/O’s persistent pursuit of AI-written stories sets them apart from most traditional publishers who, while open to leveraging AI for content creation, are currently not keen on producing content that is almost entirely machine-generated. Nevertheless, it is not difficult to envision a future where publishers, in their quest to replace human journalists, increasingly rely on this technology. Alternatively, a less dystopian outlook could entail publishers utilizing robots to churn out cost-effective, low-value content, while human journalists are reserved for more engaging and thought-provoking work.
A recently circulated internal note at G/O outlined plans for the creation of “content summaries or lists produced by AI” on two of their popular platforms, Jalopnik and the AV Club. Additionally, the Associated Press has announced a partnership with OpenAI, the prominent AI company responsible for creating ChatGPT, further solidifying the growing influence of AI in the media landscape.
While G/O’s approach to AI-written stories has raised concerns among employees, the company’s CEO, Jim Spanfeller, and Editorial Director, Merrill Brown, firmly believe in the transformative power of AI for the media industry. They argue that ignoring this technology would be a grave mistake, emphasizing the importance of testing its potential applications. Spanfeller envisions AI being leveraged not only for content creation but also for automating various tasks on the business side of the company, such as developing basic marketing plans for advertisers.
Despite the optimism expressed by G/O’s leadership, many G/O journalists are apprehensive about the implications of AI-generated content. They feel that these machine-written stories, marked by errors and lack of editorial oversight, undermine the value of genuine journalism. The sentiment among employees is that G/O prioritizes quantity over quality, creating an atmosphere detrimental to employee morale.
Responding to the backlash, Brown assures that the next set of AI-written stories will involve collaboration with top editors from each publication, ensuring rigorous oversight and review. Both Spanfeller and Brown emphasize that G/O has no intention of replacing their staff with AI. On the contrary, they aim to hire more journalists and utilize AI primarily to augment their work. However, many G/O employees remain skeptical, fearing that the introduction of AI marks a covert attempt to replace human journalists with machine-generated content.
Other newsrooms that previously experimented with AI-generated stories have pulled back. CNET, for example, admitted to publishing numerous machine-made stories that were riddled with errors and subsequently decided against producing entirely AI-generated content. BuzzFeed, despite initially expressing enthusiasm for AI, eventually discontinued its AI-driven BuzzFeed News operation. While outlets like Insider and Axios explore the integration of generative AI to assist journalists, they are reluctant to rely solely on AI for content creation.
Although there are definite advantages to machine-made content, such as its low cost, the long-term value it brings to a publication is debatable. Producing the same content through AI allows for replicability, resulting in increased competition and driving down advertising prices. Additionally, Google’s ranking algorithms, which initially ranked Gizmodo’s AI-generated articles prominently, have subsequently pushed them down in search results due to heightened scrutiny.
Drawing from his experience as the former publisher of Forbes.com, Spanfeller believes that AI-generated content can hold value for both the website and its audience. However, he emphasizes that the work of human journalists will continue to be far more valuable than what robots can produce. Spanfeller is confident that this is not an existential moment for journalism but rather an opportunity to enhance and complement traditional journalistic practices.
Conclusion:
The growing presence of AI-generated content in the media industry signifies a shift toward automation and raises questions about the future of journalism. While AI offers potential benefits such as cost-effectiveness and increased efficiency, there are concerns regarding quality, editorial oversight, and the long-term value it brings to publications. Publishers must carefully balance the use of AI with the preservation of journalistic integrity to ensure continued relevance in an evolving market.
