Live data from Hacker News

Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

futurism.com

191–200 of 409 posts

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#191
post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Circumstances can help explain, but never excuse unethical behavior

Systems can make such failures inevitable. The language of "blame" vs. "excuse" is not the most relevant.

Are you saying unethical behavior is not a choice but forced by the system? That it would be unreasonable to expect people to behave ethically in situation were the system is set up in a way that does not reward ethical behavior? That lying and cheating can always be excused because if people didn't, they would endager their societal status?

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#192
I read the bluesky in article posted and Benj Edward's images that he had sent in bluesky.

The main comment I found relevant is probably this (There is more that he has written but I am pasting what I find relevant for my comment)

> I have been sick with Covid all week and missed Mon and Tues due to this, On friday, while working from bed with a fever and very little sleep. I unintentionally made a serious journalistic error in an article about Scott Shambaugh

... > I should have takena. sick day because in the course of that interaction, I inadvertently ended up with a paraphrased version of Shambaugh's words rather than his actual words.

> Being sick and rushing to finish, I failed to verify the quotes in my outline against the original blog source before including them in my draft

The journalistic system has failed us so much that in the news cycle, we want things NOW. I think ars-technica post went viral on HN as well before the whole controversy and none were wiser until Sam commented about the false quotes.

It prefers views and to get views you have to do work now. There is no room left for someone being sick and I think that this sort of expands to every job at times.

And instead of AI being a productive tool, it can act as a noise generator. It writes enough noise that looks like signal and Tada, none are the wiser.

People think that using AI with an person is gonna make their work 10x more but what's gonna happen is the noise is raised 10x more and the work of finding signal from that noise is gonna increase 10x more (I am speaking about employment related projects, obv in personal projects this might not matter if it might have 10x noise or 100x noise if it can just do the thing you want it to do)

When AI systems are constrained, they can deny you your api request with marginal loss. But when Human people are constrained, they really can't deny your employee's request without taking massive losses at times (whole day leaves) and I have heard in some countries, sick days can be a joke. This could very well be cultural because sick days are well implemented in Europe compared to america (from what I hear)

I don't know about Benj but some reporters are really paid peanuts. Remember the pakistani newspaper which had pasted Chatgpt Verbatim with content like "“If you want, I can also create an even snappier ‘front-page style’ version with punchy one-line stats and a bold, infographic-ready layout perfect for maximum reader impact. Do you want me to do that next?." WITHIN the newspaper.

I believe that humans should be treated with more dignity so that they feel comfortable around taking sick leaves when they are sick... or just fixing this culture that we have of people chugging along in sick leaves.

Until then, AI is bound to be used, I don't think that this is gonna be a single incident, and AI will produce noise/spew random stuff. Imagine you are a journalist and you are sick and you feel like there's a magical tool which can do the job for you when you are sick. You use it and in the moments of sickness, you are in the IDGAF attitude and push the article to main.

I personally don't believe that this is gonna be a single incident with this whole story playing out like this at the very least.

If any Journalist is reading this, please take sick leaves when you are sick. Readers appreciate your writing and I hope you don't integrate AI tools into your workflow (a lot) that the work is started being done by AI in this case. Even without AI I feel like you guys might not be working at the best mental space and Readers are happy to wait if you add unique perspectives into the story, something I don't think is possible when you are sick. If any employer try to still pressure you, just share this message to them haha to tell your employer what the people want (and what brings them money long term).

I also hate how the culture has become of finding the article which came the fastest after an event happens because that would promote AI use more often than not and it to me feels like jackals coming out of nowhere to try to take whatever piece you can take out of a particular news and that to me doesn't feel soo great of look. (I know nothing about how such journalism works so sorry if I am wrong about anything, I usually am but these are just my opinions on the whole thing)

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The BBC reports on itself quite well (maybe too much even). Here's an example: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly51dzw86wo I think they're an outlier, but still I was disappointed by Ars's response. They deleted the article and didn't detail what was wrong with it at all. Felt like a cover-up.

To be completely fair, BBC news is effectively a different organisation which has the BBC name. There's a fairly good overview of it here: https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/c80l3074mgko

BBC News does have to report on itself from time to time. Here's it's "live" feed from November on the Parliamentary Committee investigation into the Trump speech edit incident:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cp34d5ly76lt

(edit: technically, it was Panorama. I'm not sure if that is part of the News remit or separate from it).

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#194
post #50

Journalists and bloggers usually write about others’ mess ups and apologies, dissecting which apologies are authentic and which apologies are non-apologies. In this incident, Aurich Lawson of Ars Technica deleted the original article (which had LLM hallucinated quotes) instead of updating it with the error. He then published a vague non-apology, just like large companies and politicians usually do. And now we learn t…

I'm sad to see them fire him. I've seen far worse: I have always approached issues by asking for accountability and improvement. Frankly, he already did: he openly apologised. I was very happy with that, it demonstrated integrity and I remained respecting him. Even worse, > I have been sick in bed with a high fever and unable to reliably address it (still am sick) [0] In an earlier HN thread, I saw someone ask why Ar…

[dead]

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#195
post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Systems can make such failures inevitable. The language of "blame" vs. "excuse" is not the most relevant.

Are you saying unethical behavior is not a choice but forced by the system? That it would be unreasonable to expect people to behave ethically in situation were the system is set up in a way that does not reward ethical behavior? That lying and cheating can always be excused because if people didn't, they would endager their societal status?

No. That's a wild gallop off in a pointless direction using the same irrelevant language.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#196
I'ts an open secret that even the larger news outlets mandate LLM use. They buy subscriptions and have guidelines on how to mask the output (so that it would read less AI'ed), how to fact-check the links and the quotes etc. The authors which aren't willing to jump on this particular train are quickly let go due to performance.

The expectation is to produce more with much less (staff), the pipeline is heavily optimized for clicks, every single headline is A/B tested- Ars isn't alone in churning out poorly reviewed clickbait (and then not owning their mistakes)

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#197

I'ts an open secret that even the larger news outlets mandate LLM use. They buy subscriptions and have guidelines on how to mask the output (so that it would read less AI'ed), how to fact-check the links and the quotes etc. The authors which aren't willing to jump on this particular train are quickly let go due to performance. The expectation is to produce more with much less (staff), the pipeline is heavily optimize…

Is there any evidence that Are Technica management induced this journalist to use AI, or are you just claiming it's an "open secret" and don't know anything about this specific incident? Because without any kind of details it kind of sounds like the latter, maybe motivated by a reflex to blame management whenever workers blunder? Unless there's evidence that a actually points at Ars Technica management, dismissing the journalists professional responsibilities using vague rumors doesn't seem appropriate.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#198
post #152
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I inadvertently ended up with a paraphrased version of Shambaugh’s words rather than his actual words,” Edwards continued. He emphasized that the “text of the article was human-written by us, and this incident was isolated and is not representative of Ars‘ editorial standards." ---------- A reporter whose bailiwick is AI should have known that he needed to check any quotes an LLM spat out. The editorial staff should…

Editorial staff? There was such a thing, in newspapers up until 2000. Then, as profits nosedived, these sorts of things largely disappeared. Purely online entities have no way to pay for real editorial staff. News has no money, compared to news of old. It's part of the reason 99% of modern news is just reporting other people's tweets or whatever. I can't imagine many news companies having much money for court battles…

Agreed. Modern news is beyond lazy, and is not journalism by any means. Too many talking heads do nothing but sit behind a screen watching others for what to say next.

Granted, a few of the remaining newspapers I'm aware of run business awards (Best restaurant, etc), and the way to win is via wining and dining them, even though the paper claims it's based on people's votes.

That style of thinking - of entitlement - probably brought the lack of interest in both cable news and traditional web/paper outlets - as the younger generations started to see through it more.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#199

I'ts an open secret that even the larger news outlets mandate LLM use. They buy subscriptions and have guidelines on how to mask the output (so that it would read less AI'ed), how to fact-check the links and the quotes etc. The authors which aren't willing to jump on this particular train are quickly let go due to performance. The expectation is to produce more with much less (staff), the pipeline is heavily optimize…

Is there any evidence that Are Technica management induced this journalist to use AI, or are you just claiming it's an "open secret" and don't know anything about this specific incident? Because without any kind of details it kind of sounds like the latter, maybe motivated by a reflex to blame management whenever workers blunder? Unless there's evidence that a actually points at Ars Technica management, dismissing th…

I didn't state that Ars Technica specifically mandate LLM use for their authors. What I did state about them is that their editorial standards are lacking, and they tend to produce a lot of clickbait.

IMO the industry is in crisis

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re at this level because the editors have always had low standers. I don’t know about you guys, but I feel like 50% of Ars headlines are completely misleading. They’ve had this problem for years. They will publish anything that gets them clicks. They do not care if a writer makes things up. They do not care if their headlines are misleading - in fact, that’s the point. They clearly got into the job in order to i…

> They’re at this level because the editors have always had low standers. It's not just Ars Technica. I would go as far as saying the big majority. I work at the biggest alliance of public service media in EU, and my role required me to interact with editors. I often do not like painting with broad brush, but I am yet to meet a humble editor yet. They approach everything with a "I know better than anyone else" attitu…

> but I am yet to meet a humble editor yet. They approach everything with a "I know better than anyone else" attitude.

They're like "UX experts" in software. One does UX for software, the other does UX for text. Same attitude problems, from the way you describe it. If the expert in something so subjectively judged is seen to be conceding anything, that might undermine their perceived expertise. Any push back is interpreted as somebody challenging their career.

Post reply on HN