I was just thinking that journalism needed less on the ground reporting and critical thought.
More mindless aggregation and repeating of existing data custom tailored to the views of the people reading it is really whats missing.
Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
131–140 of 140 posts
Re: Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Increased trading volume generally just means better price discovery. Why do you think increased trading volume means it's "pump and dump?" When I trade SPY, I increase the trading volume in the underlying S&P 500 components -- am I pumping and dumping then?
Increased trading volume driven by bot-written blogspam produced by the company PR department with the express intent of pumping their share price definitely isn't "better price discovery"
It's a good idea to follow the links before accusing someone of illegal behavior.
Here's the link to the study again: [1]. This is specifically in reference to the reporting on quarterly earnings reports that we automate for the Associated Press. It's an objective summary of the financial performance of these companies that appears in news outlets across the country (for example, [2,3,4,5,6]). The companies being reported on have no influence over the content of the articles.
From the summary:
>These articles synthesize information from firms’ press releases, analyst reports and stock performance, and are widely disseminated by major news outlets within hours of publication...This study found a positive effect between the public dissemination of objective information and market efficiency.
[1] https://insights.ap.org/industry-trends/study-news-automatio...
[2] http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/business/article158779784...
[3] http://wtop.com/business-finance/2017/05/yum-beats-street-1q...
[4] http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/04/27/dominos-sales-...
[5] http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-fedex-beats-street-1q-fore...
[6] https://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2017-04-26/her...
Re: Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
#133What about developing a counter-bot that detects and flags algorithmic content? Edit: come to think about it, isn't it what Google should be rather doing?
Yeah. Google has spent years taking the position that extremely thin content generated at a massive scale involving no genuine research or insight is spam that should be penalised. Now it's writing software to do just this.
Maybe they're doing it to train their spam story detection algorithms?
Re: Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
Increased trading volume driven by bot-written blogspam produced by the company PR department with the express intent of pumping their share price definitely isn't "better price discovery"
It's a good idea to follow the links before accusing someone of illegal behavior. Here's the link to the study again: [1]. This is specifically in reference to the reporting on quarterly earnings reports that we automate for the Associated Press. It's an objective summary of the financial performance of these companies that appears in news outlets across the country (for example, [2,3,4,5,6]). The companies being rep…
Fair response and I withdraw and apologise for the implicit accusation against your company specifically. I'm sure you would agree less benign actors exist, which is why I'm reflexively sceptical of the idea that a link between more reporting and more trading volume is an indication of its merit.
I guess if I'd taken the time to read your original link we could have a more interesting discussion on whether pretty basic earnings information in a format more friendly and available to non-professional investors was adding noise to the market or providing a useful counterweight to the amount of free publicity that more prominent companies' earnings get. But I've probably already poisoned the well on this one.
Re: Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
#135What about developing a counter-bot that detects and flags algorithmic content? Edit: come to think about it, isn't it what Google should be rather doing?
Yeah. Google has spent years taking the position that extremely thin content generated at a massive scale involving no genuine research or insight is spam that should be penalised. Now it's writing software to do just this.
I think this may be a misconception on Google's stance on content generated at a massive scale. They dock you for text spinner type content, stuff with little variation, nonsense phrasing, and identical sentences pieced together in different articles from the same source. Content generated at massive scales that are actually useful and disseminated from multiple publishers (like local news sources) are what they don't punish.
Re: Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
#136Random thoughts: * Facts delivered with arbitrary fluff words is pointless even when written by a human - it obfuscates the real purpose which is the data * Companies pay humans to deliver articles in most cases and the bias of the writer or the institution that paid for it shines through. I cannot find a real difference between intentional angling by payment or by algorithm * When the day arises where computers coul…
True but think about this though, Hunter S. Thompson started out as a sports writer. Sports is a big area where this is used currently. Gonzo journalism wouldn't have even been a thing if it was all robo-writing at the time. I think it comes down to flavor/style. Even in food for instance, yes a robot can make a meal but a chef can make a dish (maybe later reproduced by robots but still). There will always be a need…
Unless the writer with style is the one training the AI...
Re: Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Understood. Yet, this would still be an improvement over newsstories which try to read insight into something where what they do's more or less projection and speculation without saying so much. "Amazon buys WF". vs "Jeff Bezos buys WF so you never have to talk to a cashier" Or, "Physician runs over pedestrian" vs. "Physician accused of insurance fraud runs over pedestrian"
I'm confused. Your first example seems to be adding pointless false commentary, while the second is adding real information about the person.
Right, but that information is irrelevant to the cause, it's there to color opinion. Accused (not even proven) fraudster, therefore adds to possibility of fault thru negative association.
Re: Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm confused. Your first example seems to be adding pointless false commentary, while the second is adding real information about the person.
Right, but that information is irrelevant to the cause, it's there to color opinion. Accused (not even proven) fraudster, therefore adds to possibility of fault thru negative association.
If it's the most notable bit of public info about the person, go for it. If they're cherrypicking out of dozens of factoids to make them sounds bad, then it's a problem. The same headline could be fair or unfair depending on how it came about.
Re: Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a naive viewpoint I see pop up a lot. People pushing "fiction" think it's a "fact" and there's no full-proof way to convince them otherwise or even perfectly distinguish the two. People will tell you that it's a fact that vaccines cause autism or Iraq has WMDs or America is a white supremacist country. In reality, "facts" are linguistic simplifications of reality that inherently omit information and the disti…
To insist that all points of view are valid, and that truth is somehow unknowable is a viewpoint very common in academia. Using the scientific method, meta-studies and suchlike our species has built an enormous corpus of knowledge, I'm happy to let that evolving concensus be the basis of our decisions. For example the fact that vaccines do a more good than harm by an order of magnitude is no longer up for debate. The…
You're bringing up the other extreme (postmodernism), which I wouldn't agree with either. I'm arguing against certainty. We are stumbling along trying to communicate information as accurately as we can in order to produce predicted outcomes we deem desirable. Hopefully the evidence on an issue becomes so overwhelming that we can broadly reach a reasonable consensus. However, that consensus is subjective and dynamic. There is no objective process that will perfectly delineate "fact" from "fiction" as our Google News overlords would have you believe.
Re: Google is funding the creation of software that writes local news stories
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am curious though, will these systems have pen names? A simple name easy enough to recognize as machine written without the need for disclaimer? Could competition be more easily obtained between different companies based on which pen name attracts the most viewers? the one concern I have is someone has to give ths system enough information to create a story and what prevents a fake news machine?
I vote for them all to be called Writey McWriterson.
My vote is Botty McBotface :)