21–30 of 140 posts
What guarantee is there that the published news isn't fake? This might start something like viral fake facebook posts. We already have enough of those. Now we have automated fake news generator where you post your own fake news for free. This is what it will become one day. Hope they have something to stop it.
This submission is at least tangentially relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14673489 . Combining these presents an interesting opportunity to create "future news" (news that is technically fake until it isn't) thereby owning the news cycle by always being first.
About 15 years ago I had the good luck of covering a news story before it happened and got a truly tremendous amount of traffic as a result.
At least in the near future, this has the potential to make facts-and-figures based news less biased (less influenced by author idiosyncrasies). Personally, I would rather news not be laden with personal flourishes that authors add either as filler or due to personal opinion. I do imagine further into the future, the automated systems will be "improved" with tone and bias to better fit the tastes of the individual re…
I think a lot of people see bias as overt when it can be quite negligible and minor. But then they also often conflate news commentary with news. It's a pretty blurred line.
That said, local news (politics, business, crime) tends to skew less toward prescribed narrative and more toward facts and points because it's often very dry.
Very Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2Ut5GqQ1f4 Google will one day be the arbitrators of news. If it doesn't fit in their world view, whether it's true or not. Will be removed from the results. I think now is the time to setup a different model and remove their monopoly. Internet freedoms are at stake here. Do no evil? Yeah right.
Picus News - The global leader in fair, unbiased, and impartial reporting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9OrmOAuuWc
I ran across this article while researching a stock and as I read, I kept thinking, "This was not written by a person. This was written by software." [0] I checked the attribution, and there is a person's name on it. Sure, any hack can write and publish and this is probably just another example. But the odd style doesn't even strike me as 'writing the way I think' or writing and publishing quickly without editing. Fo…
I've also noticed this on financial/stock news articles. I've seen a few of them use full 4-word names for corporations ("The Coca-Cola Company") dozens of times in one article, and multiple times per sentence.
I ran across this article while researching a stock and as I read, I kept thinking, "This was not written by a person. This was written by software." [0] I checked the attribution, and there is a person's name on it. Sure, any hack can write and publish and this is probably just another example. But the odd style doesn't even strike me as 'writing the way I think' or writing and publishing quickly without editing. Fo…
I've also noticed this on financial/stock news articles. I've seen a few of them use full 4-word names for corporations ("The Coca-Cola Company") dozens of times in one article, and multiple times per sentence.
IIRC there was a small town paper in the early in 1990s that wrote high school sports stories with a HyperCard stack.
Sports, on the other hand, can be presented as a narrative of pre-defined, linear events. Those and crime stories represent probable the easiest form to automate. Pro and college typically warrant some quotes but so often preps are written by a stringer who just details the game.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you tell us more about it?
Sure. There was a series of anti-war protests at a mall around Albany NY in the run up to the second gulf war. I had been covering the story on a regular basis, but it had gotten very little attention because the media had decided that anti-war protests were not newsworthy. Well, finally at one of these protests they arrest a judge and that is newsworthy. People start looking for names and places and these match the…
Very Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2Ut5GqQ1f4 Google will one day be the arbitrators of news. If it doesn't fit in their world view, whether it's true or not. Will be removed from the results. I think now is the time to setup a different model and remove their monopoly. Internet freedoms are at stake here. Do no evil? Yeah right.
Sinclair Broadcast Group is doing basically this already, just in a low tech way and requiring its local TV stations to promoting their political agenda.