In recent months, artificial intelligence has revealed itself in many forms. While some are particularly affected by the emergence of this phenomenon, others are trying, conversely, to take advantage of it. This is the case of CNET, which has made AI one of the new feathers on its site.
While Getty Images attacked the AI for having borrowed several of its photos, for its part, CNET preferred to ally itself with it.
Articles written by an AI: what for?
Last week, Gaël Breton, the co-founder of Authority Hacker, had reported on Twitter that the CNET site, owned by Red Ventures, had used artificial intelligence when writing several of its articles. In total, no less than 73 articles have been produced by an AI since last November. Note that before publication, the contents would have (apparently) been double-checked by a being made of flesh and blood, as is now indicated by the following statement: This article has been assisted by an AI engine and reviewed, verified and edited by our editorial team. »
Following the “media hype” that resulted from this discovery, Connie Guglielmo, editor-in-chief of CNET, then spoke publicly to clarify the situation. In an article written by her (it is important to specify this), she then affirmed the will of the site to want to experiment with artificial intelligence in the media. According to her, the idea is not to replace humans with machines, but rather to experiment with a way to “assist” them in their work. That said, the controversy has obviously got the better of this somewhat… maligned initiative. Indeed, CNET has just interrupted (temporarily?) the writing of articles generated by AI. Why is that ? This is what we will try to understand.
CNET pauses articles published by IA
According to information held by The Verge, and reported by our colleagues fromEngadget, CNET would have finally decided to stop (temporarily, at least) the publication of articles following the use of an artificial intelligence. The cause ? Flagrant misprints and an obvious lack of transparency on the part of the group, both towards its readers and towards its employees. It would seem, in fact, that a good number of editors had very little information about the use of AI internally.
Finally, the declarations of the editor-in-chief of CNET, who then publicly affirmed that the articles written by IA had previously been proofread by humans, would simply be incorrect. These contents would, in reality, have been rechecked only after the media coverage of this practice and the discovery of gross errors in the articles in question. Anyway, artificial intelligence probably hasn’t finished surprising us yet. Hoping that it will not tend to generalize in the journalistic sphere and beyond…
Source : Engadget
8