Artificial intelligence is exploding in popularity, but is it reliable?
AI technology is quickly creeping into every industry, prompting new questions about whether online content comes from a human or a computer.
The company behind news outlets like Gizmodo and The AV Club came under fire from staff, the union and journalists this week after rolling out artificial intelligence (AI) generated articles filled with blatant falsehoods and haphazardly written sentences.
Last week, it was revealed that G/O Media would begin to publish articles generated by AI. The move was swiftly criticized by the GMG Union, which represents Gizmodo and other news outlets under the G/O banner.
The backlash did nothing to deter G/O Media from moving forward with the new initiative. Social media users and staff met the ensuing articles with derision, as much of the AI-generated content was filled with glaring inaccuracies and amateurish writing.
A piece published by Deadspin titled "The 15 Most Valuable Professional Sports Franchises" was panned for including outdated data on the value of various professional teams and using repetitive phrasing. The author was called "Deadspin Bot."
Gizmodo Deputy Editor James Whitbrook slams G/O Media for the company's use of AI to generate articles. (James Whitbrook/Twitter Screenshot)
Much of the inaccurate data appeared to stem from the AI being trained on old data from 2021. For example, the piece stated the Yankees were worth an estimated $4.6 billion when today, the franchise is valued at $7.1 billion.
Luke Plunkett, a senior writer for Kotaku, called the article a "simply staggering degree of pointlessness" with repetitive sentences that read like an eight-year-old wrote it.
"It's WILDLY inaccurate. Just complete dogs--t. Even straight up plagiarizing Forbes' list would have been preferable, because at least then the numbers would have been right," he added.
On Wednesday, Gizmodo was ridiculed for posting an AI-generated piece called "A Chronological List of Star Wars Movies & TV Shows" that inaccurately labeled the order of the franchise and included bare-bones descriptions of the films.
RACIST ROBOTS? NYC NOW REQUIRES 'BIAS AUDIT' WHEN AI USED FOR JOB RECRUITING
A statement put out by the unions representing some employees of G/O Media condemning the company's rollout of AI-generated content. (GMG Union/Twitter Screenshot )
Later that day, io9 and Gizmodo Deputy Editor James Whitbrook claimed he was only informed of the article 10 minutes before its publication and no one at io9 played a role in editing or publishing the piece. In a statement sent to G/O Media, Whitbrook called the content "embarrassing, unpublishable, disrespectful" of both the audience and the company's staff.
"That's the formal part, here's my own personal comment: lmao, it's f---ing dogs—t," Whitbrook wrote in a follow-up tweet.
Following the release of the AI-generated content, GMG Union put out a statement that characterized G/O Media as a company intent on spending less and extracting more, regardless of the impact on quality.
"The hard work of journalists cannot be replaced by unreliable AI programs notorious for creating falsehoods and plagiarizing the work of real writers. Our newsrooms have spent decades building trust with audiences—introducing computer-generated garbage undermines our ability to do our jobs, erodes trust in us as journalists, damages our brands and threatens our jobs," the statement read in part.
Internal Slack messages between G/O Media management and staff posted to Twitter by media reporter Max Tani. (Max Tani/Twitter Screenshot)
In a subsequent tweet, the union called the move "unethical and unacceptable" and urged readers to avoid clicking on articles with a byline ending in "Bot."
The move also received condemnation from G/O Media staff.
In an internal Slack message to staff, G/O Editorial Director Merrill Brown announced that AV Club, Gizmodo, Takeout and Deadspin had begun "limited testing" on AI-generated content, acknowledging the decision could be "contentious" for some.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
"You may spot errors. You may have issues with the tone and/or style. I am aware you object to this writ large and that your respective unions have already and will continue to weigh in with objections and other issues. We will learn from this test and respond accordingly," he said in part.
The message received dozens of thumbs-down emoji from the staff.
"None of our job descriptions include editing or reviewing AI-produced content. I don't see how we can be expected to spend time assessing these posts or compiling comments about them," one employee replied.
GMG did not return Fox News Digital's request for comment. A spokesperson for G/O Media directed Fox News Digital to comments made by Editorial Director Merrill Brown on June 29.
At the time, Brown said it was "utterly appropriate" and in fact the company's "responsibility" to roll out to AI initiatives relatively early in the technology's history.
"As such, we're rolling out a trial next week that's designed to test our editorial and technological thinking about use of AI," he added. "This trial is producing just a handful of stories for most of our sites that are basically built around lists and data. These features aren't replacing work currently being done by writers and editors, and we hope that over time if we get these forms of content right and produced at scale, AI will, via search and promotion, help us grow our audience."
Brown also hinted at future AI pilot projects and called the move an "early, modest test" that will have some errors.