Will AI’s slow anaconda crush mean the end of journalism? It’s hard to imagine that this will completely obliterate the profession, unless machines enslave humanity like in the “Matrix” movies. Nosy people will always interfere in everyone’s affairs.
But major media companies are in dire straits, and their executives don’t seem very happy about the future, which could spell the end of the traditional news agency.
This is according to a new survey More than 280 media leaders from 51 countries were reviewed by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ). It found that on average, a sample of editors, CEOs and digital executives expect a 43 percent decline in traffic to their websites over the next three years – which would be a devastating blow to their commercial operations.
Traffic to news sites is already declining, a trend that preceded the AI boom but accelerated as chatbots like ChatGPT began to replace search engines. Analytics data cited in the RISJ report shows that web traffic directed to news sites from Google search has dropped by 33 percent worldwide.
With such signs, RISJ senior research associate Nick Newman predicts that the “traffic era” of the early Internet, which once sustained traditional publishers, may finally be over.
“It’s not clear what happens next,” Newman told Guardian. “Publishers fear that AI chatbots are creating a new convenient way to access information that could get news brands – and journalists – into trouble.”
“But technology platforms don’t hold all the cards,” he said. “Trustworthy news, expert analysis and viewpoints are important to both individuals and society, especially in uncertain times. Great storytelling – and a human touch – is going to be hard for AI to replicate.”
Seeing the writing on the wall, some publishers have moved to adopt AI technology. But the way it is being implemented in many cases is almost certainly a miscalculation, endangering the basic principles of good journalism by introducing hallucination technology into the loop – which incidentally says nothing about the periodic layoffs that are hampering the industry.
Some cases appear to be more harmless. the new York TimesFor example, has been Using AI to help craft headlines. But a shocking demonstration recently revealed how the technology can go horribly wrong. Washington Post Last month a feature to create personalized AI-generated podcasts that would broadcast the newspaper’s latest stories was launched, which immediately caused an uproar both internally and externally. The podcast was filled with factual errors and in some cases even editorialized on developing stories. The venture was mocked online, and WaPo Employees fumed against the leadership, calling it “shocking” and a “disaster.”
But the logic behind these moves is that desperate times call for desperate, wildly ill-advised measures, and the industry is indeed desperate. According to the RISJ report, only 38 percent of media leaders surveyed say they are confident about journalism’s prospects in the coming years, a steep decline of 22 percent from four years ago.
To deal with these problems, publishers emphasized some of the aspects that make journalism unique, such as original investigations, grassroots reporting, and human-oriented stories. On the other hand, he said they would reduce general news and service journalism, which he expected to be marketed by AI. He also supported involving journalists in content creation such as creating shortform videos to gain a foothold in social media.
More on AI: After being robbed by AI companies, Wikipedia signs agreement to get paid from them
