Sources: Google tests an AI tool to produce news stories, pitching the service to the NYT, WaPo, News Corp, and other outlets as a helpmate for journalists
Google’s outreach extends a long-running effort to put its tools into newsroom workflows, following its earlier News Lab partnerships with media organizations. The significance is that the pitch targets publishers that are both major news producers and consequential partners in Google’s distribution ecosystem.
The later record shows the relationship moving beyond tooling: the NYT authorized selected AI tools for editorial and product teams, while Google pursued a publisher AI-licensing pilot. That makes this early newsroom-tool test a precursor to negotiations over how publishers participate in—and retain leverage over—AI-enabled news products.
First-order effects
Google, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and News Corp must evaluate whether the tool can assist reporting and production without weakening editorial control or trust.
The demonstrations give Google direct feedback from large publishers on where a newsroom AI assistant could fit into existing editorial workflows.
Second-order effects
A successful pilot would pressure other newsroom-technology vendors and AI providers to offer tools that integrate with publisher processes rather than merely generate generic text.
News organizations may increasingly negotiate AI as both a workflow technology and a content-rights relationship, especially where platform features can use or learn from publisher material.
If such tools become embedded in production, Google’s existing distribution role could translate into greater influence over the technical layer of journalism; publisher controls and licensing terms would determine how concentrated that influence becomes.
The trend: This is an early instance of AI moving from standalone generation into publisher-controlled newsroom workflows, alongside a growing contest over content rights and platform leverage.
Honestly horrific any editors even took this meeting, or what abject failure of understanding what journalism even *is* that decision implies from leadership [embedded post]
Google proposing to resell the rendered product of scraping news sites *back to the news sites* after extracting the maximum value out of it in other contexts and using that profit to further refine it really is the lowest point of their extraction model.
This is why we ALL should be speaking against the use and promulgation of AI in all industries. Journalists, writers, our work, our livelihoods are being threatened by the wealthiest people -who by the way are the true minority in terms of numbers- b/c they only care about profit
Like aggregation, video, and a dozen other “innovations” before it, AI will not actually enhance journalism in any way, it will simply be the buzzword that execs use as an excuse to layoff actual journalists.
I and all other experts, sources, tipsters, public relations people, witnesses, and soul-of-the-earth small-town diner patrons with political opinions to share every four years all eagerly await the experience of being interviewed by the new crack journalistic AIs.
I'm generally pro-A.I. and automation to make work easier and more efficient, and to get better information to people faster, but after we come to rely on them, the A.I. companies and tools will turn on media the same way the social platforms did. https://www.nytimes.com/...
“One of the three people familiar with the product said that Google believed it could serve as a kind of personal assistant for journalists, automating some tasks to free up time for others, and that the company saw it as responsible technology...” https://www.nytimes.com/...
Scoop: Google is testing a new tool, known internally as “Genesis,” that can write news articles. It has been demo'd for The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal. w/@nicoagrant https://www.nytimes.com/...
“But Google's new tool is sure to spur anxiety, too, among journalists who have been writing their own articles for centuries.” 💩🥵🧐 https://www.nytimes.com/...
This will be used to replace people. It might help where there are staffing shortages (e.g., independent local news) provided rigorous oversight. For larger pubs it's a brand killer. https://www.nytimes.com/...?
Fuuuucckkkkkkkkkkk that. Google already has its hooks in deep enough with Search and its ad stack. Let's just agree not to let them use generative AI tools to shape the future of news writing and, all written content, ok?
@PirateLawyerr ... By the way, I love the way this line was written: “But Google's new tool is sure to spur anxiety, too, among journalists who have been writing their own articles for centuries.” Because it sounds like there are journalists out there who have been writing for 10…