|
|
Post by mhbruin on Feb 29, 2024 7:29:55 GMT -8
Google is Paying News Outlets to Steal From Other News OutletsGoogle has created a new suite of AI tools—tools that have reportedly not yet been released to the public, but that are being provided to news outlets as part of the Google News Initiative. According to Adweek, small news outlets are being offered five-figure contracts in which Google pays them to use the tools for up to a year, so long as they publish a minimum amount of AI-generated content. Nothing in the contract requires outlets to label the articles created with these tools to let readers know how they were produced. As bad as that sounds, the details are worse. Because what Google appears to have created is a sophisticated “aggregation” engine, one that isn’t just trained on existing text but also incorporates “language taken almost verbatim from the source material,” according to Adweek. The tool makes it simple for outlets to create a “new” article by simply lifting content from outlets that put in the reporting legwork. Limbo Journalism: How low can your go? Also, news outlet 1 uses AI, which makes up a story. Outlet 2 picks it up. Outlet 3 gets the story from Outlet 2. Then Outlet 1 can cite Outlet 3 as confirming the story. It's like the Bush White House leaking a fake story to the NYT and after the NYT prints the story, the White House cites the NYT as a source of the fake story. |
|
|
|
Post by sagobob on Feb 29, 2024 17:08:52 GMT -8
Limbo Journalism: How low can your go? Also, news outlet 1 uses AI, which makes up a story. Outlet 2 picks it up. Outlet 3 gets the story from Outlet 2. Then Outlet 1 can cite Outlet 3 as confirming the story. It's like the Bush White House leaking a fake story to the NYT and after the NYT prints the story, the White House cites the NYT as a source of the fake story. Here's an example, from an MSN news feed: "Note: We, TheUBJ, do not produce the news content presented here. The information provided is a rewritten version sourced from various sources on the internet through AI news feed technology. We do not claim ownership or authorship of the news content. The original kyivindependent.com/finnish-defense-minister-there-are-no-restrictions-on-usage-of-finnish-military-aid-provided-to-ukraine/ link is provided for reference." Is that a disclaimer or just honest reporting? |
|
|
|
Post by mhbruin on Mar 1, 2024 7:27:54 GMT -8
Also, news outlet 1 uses AI, which makes up a story. Outlet 2 picks it up. Outlet 3 gets the story from Outlet 2. Then Outlet 1 can cite Outlet 3 as confirming the story. It's like the Bush White House leaking a fake story to the NYT and after the NYT prints the story, the White House cites the NYT as a source of the fake story. Here's an example, from an MSN news feed: "Note: We, TheUBJ, do not produce the news content presented here. The information provided is a rewritten version sourced from various sources on the internet through AI news feed technology. We do not claim ownership or authorship of the news content. The original kyivindependent.com/finnish-defense-minister-there-are-no-restrictions-on-usage-of-finnish-military-aid-provided-to-ukraine/ link is provided for reference." Is that a disclaimer or just honest reporting? A real disclaimer would say, "Since we didn't source the information, we have no idea if it is accurate. It is just something we read somewhere on the Internet." Then again, I probably should include the same disclaimer every day. I am definitely not an AI. I am not artificial (although I have consumed enough artificial ingredients and I am what I eat.) As for intelligence, I guess that's a matter of opinion. |
|
