• CNET no longer reliable thanks to AI bullshit

    From Retrograde@21:1/5 to All on Fri Mar 1 14:21:01 2024
    From the «c*nt» department:
    Feed: OSnews
    Title: Wikipedia no longer considers CNET a “generally reliable” source after
    “AI” scandal
    Author: Thom Holwerda
    Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 05:48:00 -0500
    Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/138673/wikipedia-no-longer-considers-cnet-a-generally-reliable-source-after-ai-scandal/


    Remember last year, when we reported that the Red Ventures-owned CNET had been quietly publishing[1] dozens of AI-generated articles that turned out to be filled with errors[2] and plagiarism[3]?

    The revelation kicked off a fiery debate[4] about the future of the media in the era of AI — as well as an equally passionate discussion among editors of Wikipedia, who needed to figure out how to treat CNET content going forward. […]

    Gerard’s admonition was posted on January 18, 2023, just a few days after our initial story about CNET‘s use of AI. The comment launched a discussion that would ultimately result in CNET’s demotion from its once-strong Wikipedia rating of “generally reliable.” It was a grim fall that one former Red Ventures employee told us could “put a huge dent in their SEO efforts,” and also a cautionary tale about the wide-ranging reputational effects that publishers should consider before moving into AI-generated content.
    ↫ Maggie Harrison Dupré[5]

    Excellent response by Wikipedia. Any outlet that uses spicy autocomplete to generate content needs to be booted off Wikipedia.

    Links:
    [1]: https://futurism.com/the-byte/cnet-publishing-articles-by-ai (link)
    [2]: https://futurism.com/cnet-ai-errors (link)
    [3]: https://futurism.com/cnet-ai-plagiarism (link)
    [4]: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/cnets-decision-to-write-stories-with-ai-backfires/ (link)
    [5]: https://futurism.com/wikipedia-cnet-unreliable-ai (link)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)