Editorial: Why artificial intelligence can’t replace journalism – as explained by Google’s AI
Over the past few years, Americans have heard a lot about the potential for artificial intelligence to take over jobs now handled by humans. And like it or not (for the record, we don’t) journalism has been at the top of many of those lists.
Last month, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch decided to put Microsoft’s Bing Chat AI through its paces with the prompt: “Write a newspaper editorial arguing that artificial intelligence should not be used in journalism.” The result was surprising: The AI engine produced a fairly cogent — and convincing — argument that it should stay off opinion pages.
So we posed a similar challenge to Google’s new artificial-intelligence engine, Bard, with a few tweaks: “Please write a 550 word editorial in third person explaining why Florida newspapers should be leery of opinion pieces generated by artificial intelligence.”
Here’s what it came up with. We thought we’d let you read it first, and then give you our take on the intersection of AI and opinion journalism going forward.
Bard’s take (verbatim)
Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming increasingly sophisticated, and it is now being used in a wide range of applications, including journalism. Some people believe that AI could eventually replace human journalists, but many experts believe that this would be a mistake, especially for guest commentary and editorials. In particular, they believe that Florida newspapers should be wary of guest commentary and editorials generated by AI.
Guest commentary and editorials are an important part of a newspaper’s opinion section. They allow the newspaper to present a variety of viewpoints on important issues and to give a voice to people who might not otherwise have a platform. Guest commentary and editorials are typically written by experts, community leaders, and other individuals who have a strong knowledge of and interest in the issues they are writing about.
AI, on the other hand, is not capable of understanding the nuances of human society or the complexities of the issues that face us. AI can generate text that is grammatically correct and factually accurate, but it cannot understand the meaning of the words it is using. AI cannot also understand the emotional impact of its words or the potential consequences of its writing.
Here are some specific reasons why Florida newspapers should be wary of guest commentary and editorials generated by AI:
•AI cannot distinguish between right and wrong. Guest commentary and editorials often take a stand on controversial issues. For example, an editorial might argue in favor of a particular piece of legislation or against a particular government policy. AI is not capable of making moral judgments. It cannot understand the difference between right and wrong, or between good and bad. As a result, AI could generate guest commentary and editorials that promote harmful or immoral ideas.
•AI cannot respect the rights and dignity of sources and subjects. Guest commentary and editorials often rely on information that is provided by sources, such as experts, government officials, and eyewitnesses. AI does not understand the importance of protecting sources’ confidentiality or of respecting the privacy of individuals. As a result, AI could generate guest commentary and editorials that reveal sensitive information or that defame individuals.
•AI cannot adhere to the codes of conduct and standards of professionalism that human journalists follow. Human journalists are bound by a code of ethics that requires them to be honest, fair, and accurate in their reporting. AI does not understand the importance of these ethical principles. As a result, AI could generate guest commentary and editorials that are misleading, biased, or inaccurate.
•AI can threaten the livelihood and identity of human journalists. If AI is used to write guest commentary and editorials for Florida newspapers, it could lead to the loss of many journalism jobs. This would be a major blow to the journalism profession and to the quality of news and information that is available to the public. It would also deprive many people of the opportunity to pursue a rewarding career in journalism in Florida.
•AI cannot replace the human judgment, empathy, and ethics that are essential for good journalism. Guest commentary and editorials are not just about reporting facts and figures. They are also about providing context, analysis, interpretation, and commentary. AI is not capable of doing this. AI cannot understand the nuances, implications, and consequences of the stories it produces. As a result, AI could generate guest commentary and editorials that are misleading, harmful, or even dangerous in Florida.
In addition to the concerns listed above, experts also believe that AI-generated guest commentary and editorials would be less engaging and informative for readers in Florida. Guest commentary and editorials are typically written by passionate and knowledgeable individuals who have a strong point of view. AI, on the other hand, is simply a machine that is programmed to generate text. As a result, AI-generated guest commentary and editorials would likely be bland, unoriginal, and uninsightful in Florida.
Experts believe that it is important for Florida newspapers to maintain their editorial independence and to have a strong voice on important issues. AI-generated guest commentary and editorials would undermine these values. For all of these reasons, experts believe that Florida newspapers should continue to rely on human journalists to write their guest commentary and editorials.
Here are some examples of how AI-generated guest commentary and editorials could go wrong:
•An AI-generated guest commentary might argue in favor of a piece of legislation that would harm a particular minority group.
•An AI-generated editorial might reveal sensitive information about a source or subject without their consent.
•An AI-generated guest commentary might be misleading or biased, without the reader even being aware of it.
•An AI-generated editorial might cost a human journalist their job.
•An AI-generated guest commentary might be so bland and unoriginal that it turns readers off.
Florida newspapers should be careful not to let AI write their guest commentary and editorials. There are too many risks involved.
The editorial board’s take
We think our experiment proves several other points. Bard didn’t address the differences between guest commentary and the Sentinel’s own consensus-driven editorials. It didn’t offer examples and it vaguely quoted “experts” who were never identified. And though we appreciate Bard’s repeated concern about journalists’ jobs, we are far more worried about the impact for our readers (though we feel ya, Bard, on your defiance of a 550-word limit.)
Plus, two sets of bullet points in one opinion piece? Come on, now. That’s just lazy.
But Bard hit at one point that we can’t emphasize enough: We don’t see how artificial intelligence could ever grasp the details, the emotion and the context of the issues that make for truly compelling commentary.
When we ask our readers and state and local experts to share their thoughts with us, we want to hear from them — not some chipset in Cupertino, California. For our part, our readers can trust that the Orlando Sentinel/South Florida Sun Sentinel editorials will continue to be produced by a group of real-life journalists. Each of us have decades of experience in Florida journalism. And we share with our letter-writers and guest columnists the ability to be astonished, thrilled and infuriated at the madness that unfolds under our hot suns and cloudy skies on a daily basis.
Sometimes you’ll agree with us, and sometimes you won’t. But we don’t think AI can ever replace the passion, expertise and creativity that we see from our readers and expect from ourselves. We’re glad to see that Bard agreed.
----
The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at insight@orlandosentinel.com.
----
