New AP Guidelines Lay the Groundwork For AI-Assisted Newsrooms (engadget.com) 11
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Engadget: The Associated Press published standards today for generative AI use in its newsroom. The organization, which has a licensing agreement with ChatGPT maker OpenAI, listed a fairly restrictive and common-sense list of measures around the burgeoning tech while cautioning its staff not to use AI to make publishable content. Although nothing in the new guidelines is particularly controversial, less scrupulous outlets could view the AP's blessing as a license to use generative AI more excessively or underhandedly.
The organization's AI manifesto underscores a belief that artificial intelligence content should be treated as the flawed tool that it is -- not a replacement for trained writers, editors and reporters exercising their best judgment. "We do not see AI as a replacement of journalists in any way," the AP's Vice President for Standards and Inclusion, Amanda Barrett, wrote in an article about its approach to AI today. "It is the responsibility of AP journalists to be accountable for the accuracy and fairness of the information we share." The article directs its journalists to view AI-generated content as "unvetted source material," to which editorial staff "must apply their editorial judgment and AP's sourcing standards when considering any information for publication." It says employees may "experiment with ChatGPT with caution" but not create publishable content with it. That includes images, too. "In accordance with our standards, we do not alter any elements of our photos, video or audio," it states. "Therefore, we do not allow the use of generative AI to add or subtract any elements." However, it carved an exception for stories where AI illustrations or art are a story's subject -- and even then, it has to be clearly labeled as such.
Barrett warns about AI's potential for spreading misinformation. To prevent the accidental publishing of anything AI-created that appears authentic, she says AP journalists "should exercise the same caution and skepticism they would normally, including trying to identify the source of the original content, doing a reverse image search to help verify an image's origin, and checking for reports with similar content from trusted media." To protect privacy, the guidelines also prohibit writers from entering "confidential or sensitive information into AI tools." Although that's a relatively common-sense and uncontroversial set of rules, other media outlets have been less discerning. [...] It's not hard to imagine other outlets -- desperate for an edge in the highly competitive media landscape -- viewing the AP's (tightly restricted) AI use as a green light to make robot journalism a central figure in their newsrooms, publishing poorly edited / inaccurate content or failing to label AI-generated work as such. Further reading: NYT Prohibits Using Its Content To Train AI Models
The organization's AI manifesto underscores a belief that artificial intelligence content should be treated as the flawed tool that it is -- not a replacement for trained writers, editors and reporters exercising their best judgment. "We do not see AI as a replacement of journalists in any way," the AP's Vice President for Standards and Inclusion, Amanda Barrett, wrote in an article about its approach to AI today. "It is the responsibility of AP journalists to be accountable for the accuracy and fairness of the information we share." The article directs its journalists to view AI-generated content as "unvetted source material," to which editorial staff "must apply their editorial judgment and AP's sourcing standards when considering any information for publication." It says employees may "experiment with ChatGPT with caution" but not create publishable content with it. That includes images, too. "In accordance with our standards, we do not alter any elements of our photos, video or audio," it states. "Therefore, we do not allow the use of generative AI to add or subtract any elements." However, it carved an exception for stories where AI illustrations or art are a story's subject -- and even then, it has to be clearly labeled as such.
Barrett warns about AI's potential for spreading misinformation. To prevent the accidental publishing of anything AI-created that appears authentic, she says AP journalists "should exercise the same caution and skepticism they would normally, including trying to identify the source of the original content, doing a reverse image search to help verify an image's origin, and checking for reports with similar content from trusted media." To protect privacy, the guidelines also prohibit writers from entering "confidential or sensitive information into AI tools." Although that's a relatively common-sense and uncontroversial set of rules, other media outlets have been less discerning. [...] It's not hard to imagine other outlets -- desperate for an edge in the highly competitive media landscape -- viewing the AP's (tightly restricted) AI use as a green light to make robot journalism a central figure in their newsrooms, publishing poorly edited / inaccurate content or failing to label AI-generated work as such. Further reading: NYT Prohibits Using Its Content To Train AI Models
Where are the robots? (Score:2)
How about using AI for the actual difficult problems? I am talking about farming, logistics, meal prep, and manufacturing. Why aren't autonomous systems and robots used to harvest crops? Why aren't houses being built with robots? Alongside that, we need UBI so that every person can afford basic shelter and food,.
Re:Where are the robots? (Score:4, Informative)
Why aren't autonomous systems and robots used to harvest crops?
They are! Crops which are easily machine harvested are now being harvested by autonomous vehicles. But a lot of crops still have to be hand picked because we don't yet have machines which can do that job without damaging the produce, at least not cost effectively.
Alongside that, we need UBI so that every person can afford basic shelter and food,.
That is clearly not The Plan(tm). They obviously want to kill a bunch of us off instead of feeding us.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
How about using AI for the actual difficult problems?
The "AI" in ChatGPT and such is not the kind that can be used for "difficult problems", or really for much of anything useful at all. You're thinking of various other kinds of technology -- totally different -- that is also called "AI". And which is used for all kinds of purposes.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just that advances in technology take time and all of these represent engineering problems that are incredibly challenging.
Comma (Score:3)
But will they finally start using the Oxford comma?
Re: (Score:2)
But will they finally start using the Oxford comma?
What about the Scottish dash? The Canadian blank? Or the French kiss?
I have supported the idea of the French kiss for a long time now.
Re: (Score:2)
But will they finally start using the Oxford comma?
They will if it's necessary to appease their bosses, advertisers and grammar Nazis.
p.s. I tried using ChatGPT 3.5 to draft up a wittier response and it (I?) failed miserably. Like it couldn't even understand that there shouldn't be a command between the final two items.
Doesn't replace? For how long? (Score:2)
I mean, real people are annoying, they might object to the boss' demand that they write and published pure propaganda ("stolen election!").
Accountability? (Score:2)
At least we could fire an editor or writer. Now the bullshit will roll out with no one to blame.
But the news has been bullshit since I read Christopher Columbus discovered America with people on it.