What's Journalism For, Mr. Chatbot?
Is Big AI Going To Take Over Big J?
 |
| Ya wanna repeat that? |
(It's already got a foot in that door.)
Will It Be "Aligned?"
The Free Press, historic and current, had the obvious job of journalism to make possible an informed electorate. I say “had” because some of the assumptions in that are getting tricky.
Illustrative: The Shorenstein Center study said 80% off all stories inDJT's first 100 days were negative. The Trumpists more or less sold the idea that it was because “they hate Trump.” The right was quick to grab the potential of this. Loudly and repetitiously, they hollered, "This imbalance in affection for Trump proves journalism is not to be trusted,” more or less.
That was one of the kick-offs for the demonization of the MSM. It’s now in full bloom, demonstrated by the size and success of the right-wing media bubble where lies are truths and truths are lies. Half truths… don’t get me started.
From the left there were no successful ripostes saying: “This was not bias. This was the news. We covered the news, and the events covered were actually “negative” in themselves. Surprise, all the fires we covered were actually hot.”
As usual the left responds to propaganda uppercuts weakly. (By looking up very quickly.) A weak defense in the battle to define truth always forfeits to truth-for-hire. The polarization we worry so much about is morphing into two definitions of truth — separate realities. That can’t be good.
In my view, (ta da!) journalism’s #1 job in this sci-fi world is to quash all the lies, an impossible goal. So its #2 job is the quash all the lies it can and expose all the liars it can and help the world believe that truth is valuable and not hopelessly lost.
~~~~~~~~~
Do you think an AI journalist, a "fine-tuned" chatbot, is up to the job of defining the truth truthfully? I'm agnostic, so far. And a little worried.
Comments