How is AI impacting journalism?

Would you pay for a digital publication that delivers journalism about business and start-ups across India?

Most business-savvy people would.

What if the publication told you that its articles are now AI-generated?

Would you still be willing to be a paid subscriber??

Let’s assume the articles remain as “sharp, original, insightful, and analytical” as ever.?

While we ponder on this, it’s pertinent to recall THE KEN’s stand last year on this very issue.? It asserted: “ChatGPT and others can write many things, but they will not write at The Ken”.

Speaking for myself, I would be happy to pay for journals I admire (and, in turn, to journalists). But I wouldn’t be as nearly as comfortable paying for AI-generated journalism. It just feels unfair, though in terms of informational advantage, they likely offer similar value.?

An article on The Conversation notes that, “The news audiences we spoke to overall felt most comfortable with journalists using AI for behind-the-scenes tasks rather than for editing and creating.”

Elsewhere in the article: “Our research found news audiences seem to be more comfortable with journalists using AI for certain tasks when they themselves have used it for similar purposes.”?

However, “they [news audiences] were quite uncomfortable with the idea of an AI avatar presenting the news, for example.”

Medium.com just released their guideline that takes cognizance of its community’s feedback on AI-generated content.

A user is quoted saying, “I’m not interested in my paid subscription subsidizing AI. I signed up to pay humans their worth for doing real work. I don’t want to give AI the eyeball hours or oxygen on a subscription platform.”

Another user offers a valuable suggestion: “If people are going to use AI-generated content, I hope it will be identified as such.”

In response, Medium.com has updated its distribution standards to include:?

“We welcome the responsible use of AI-assistive technology on Medium. To promote transparency, and help set reader expectations, we require that any story created with AI assistance be clearly labeled as such.”

Medium.com emphasizes that this is their initial approach and their policy may change as the tech evolves.?

For now, if they encounter AI-generated content that is not explicitly disclosed as such, it won’t distribute it across Medium’s network.

Summary of the AI Guidelines

The AI stance differs across platforms.

A few points have been repeatedly emphasized in these guidelines. Below-mentioned are the most repeated guidelines.?

Human Oversight

Aware that AI’s use can no longer be eliminated, they seek to regulate it instead.

Humans are permitted to use AI to assist research, editing and other tasks. But, importantly, no article can be published without human oversight.?

For instance, here’s what The New York Times says:?

“Our editors may employ generative A.I. tools to create initial drafts of headlines, summaries of Times articles and other text that helps us produce and distribute the news. That’s always done with human oversight and review, in accordance with our principles for the use of such tools. We don’t use A.I. to write articles, and journalists are ultimately responsible for everything that we publish.”

However, some platforms (like Fanfare) have gone to the extent of declaring they’ll debar writers who submit AI-generated content.?

Transparency

To me, it feels unfair when an AI-generated content is passed off as human writing.?

Therefore, like citations of yore, instances of AI use must be duly acknowledged and labeled as such. Most guidelines mandate prominently displayed disclosure that clearly defines the full extent and nature of AI’s use.?

For example, The Writing Cooperative only requires people to acknowledge AI’s use and provide citations for AI-generated content.?

Permitted vs. Non-permitted use

Some guidelines permit AI’s use to create headlines, social media posts and generate summaries. Its use for research, creating content frameworks and generating ideas is largely legitimate too.

That said, WIRED has announced that it won’t publish text edited by AI either.?

However, on the question of using AI to generate images and videos, the guidelines are still divided. While a few organizations vehemently oppose AI’s use for images, many others are open to experiment with AI to produce visual creatives.?

The situation is fluid at the moment and will change based on how the tech landscape evolves.?

Responsibility

The responsibility for errors or copyrights infringement due to AI’s use falls squarely on its publishers. This is important, because it’s legally difficult to place liability on AI.?

Why is this??

To prove criminal liability, a lot of emphasis is laid on “intent”. However, since AI has no “adversarial intent”, it is difficult to place liability on it.

However, it’s possible to place guardrails for AI outputs (which can be effectively determined by people).?

So, like machines, the liability does hold good for the people who designed and deployed the AI program. In the near future, the courts may be flooded with cases of copyright infringement by AI.?

To preempt such an eventuality, it might be easier to constitute a safe harbor rule for AI use as well. If an AI company can prove that it put sufficient safeguards to reduce AI misuse, its liability in the event of copyright infringement must be limited.

What’s your role as an audience?

I would personally prefer 100% human journalism. However, that’s no longer a viable option.

It would be pragmatic, however, to support journalism that leverages AI to enhance human output rather than replace it.?

I, for one, would be following this space with keen interest.?