Yet Another Company Caught Using ‘AI’ To Quietly Create Fake Journalists And Fake Journalism

Journalism

from the the-'AI'-journalism-revolution-is-going-great,-thanks-for-asking dept

While “AI” (language learning models) certainly could help journalism, the fail upward brunchlords in charge of most modern media outlets instead see the technology as a way to cut corners, undermine labor, and badly automate low-quality, ultra-low effort, SEO-chasing clickbait.

As a result we’ve seen an endless number of scandals where companies use LLMs to create entirely fake journalists and hollow journalism, usually without informing their staff or their readership. When they’re caught (as we saw with CNET, Gannett, or Sports Illustrated), they usually pretend to be concerned, throw their AI partner under the bus, then get right back to doing it.

This week another similar venture, Hoodline, is facing similar criticism. Hoodline was created in 2014 to fill the growing void left with the death of quality news. (aka “news deserts”). Executives there apparently thought the best way to do that was to create fake “AI” local journalists to write a lot of low-quality aggregated crap — without adequately informing readers about it:

“…until recently, the site had further blurred the line between reality and illusion. Screenshots captured last year by the Internet Archive and local outlet Gazetteer showed Hoodline had further embellished its AI author bylines with what appeared to be AI-generated headshots resembling real people and fake biographical information.

“Nina is a long-time writer and a Bay Area Native who writes about good food & delicious drink, tantalizing tech & bustling business,” one biography claimed.”

We’ve noted repeatedly how the death of local news is a real issue. Gone are most local newspapers, and in their place have been seeded a rotating crop of right wing propagandists pretending to be local TV news (like Sinclair Broadcasting) or fake “pink slime” propaganda rags (usually also almost exclusively coming from the right wing) pretending to be local newspapers.

This has not only resulted in a more ignorant and divided public, but has had a measurable impact on electoral outcomes. It also results in far fewer real gumshoe journalists covering local courts and city hall proceedings, something corrupt officials adore.

And while trying to fix this problem is a noble and thankless calling, Hoodline is clearly going about it the wrong way. They’re not using LLMs to genuinely improve things, they’re using LLMs to create a sort of simulacrum of real local journalism, and hoping nobody could tell the difference. Instead of helping journalism, that undermines the public’s already shaky trust in an already struggling sector:

“Employing AI to help local journalists save time so they can focus on doing more in-depth investigations is qualitatively different from churning out a high amount of low-quality stories that do nothing to provide people with timely and relevant information about what is happening in their community, or that provides them with a better understanding of how the things happening around them will end up affecting them,” [Felix] Simon told CNN.

Again there are a bunch of things LLMs can help journalists with. Editing, transcription, digging up court documents, data analysis, easing administrative burdens, etc. But then, of course, that value proposition has to be weighed against the immense water and power suck of AI during a period where increased climate destabilization is putting unprecedented strain on long-neglected infrastructure.

And is that kind of a value proposition worth it if what’s being created is just derivative dreck?

If you look at what Hoodline is producing (here’s our local version for Seattle) the content is exclusively aggregating press releases and reporting from elsewhere without much if any original reporting or intelligent analysis. They’re effectively injecting themselves into the news bloodstream to redirect ad revenue that could go to real reporting outlets to their shoddy, (badly) automated simulacrum.

And given that companies like Google aren’t willing to use their untold billions to actually maintain quality control over Google News and Google search, it’s easier than ever for these kinds of pseudo-news outlets (and far less ethical outright propaganda and spam merchants) to find success. In many cases, far easier than genuine journalists who can’t even get Google to index their website.

Hoodline has since shifted things around slightly and now uses a small “AI” badge to indicate the article was written with the help of LLMs. But how much help, and whether the authors are actually real people with any meaningful understanding of local events they’re covering, remains decidedly unclear.

Filed Under: ai, automation, clickbait, journalism, language learning models, media, reporting, simulacrum, spam
Companies: hoodline