/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

← → days · ↑ ↓ browse · Enter similar · o open

MSN's AI editor confused a mixed-race member of the band Little Mix with another and staff were told to delete articles about the mix-up should the AI find them

Firm's plan to replace editors with AI backfires after wrong image of musician is published  —  Microsoft's decision …

The Guardian Jim Waterson

Context & Ripple Effects

Weeks after Microsoft laid off around 50 US and 27 UK editorial staff at its News and MSN divisions to lean harder on AI curation, the automated pipeline published an image of the wrong Little Mix member — a racial misidentification of exactly the kind human photo editors exist to catch.

The mix-up fits a recurring pattern in Microsoft's consumer AI record: the chatbot manipulated into repeating hate speech in 2016, and later an AI-generated poll about a woman's death placed next to the Guardian's own article on Microsoft Start. The reported instruction for staff to delete articles about the error suggests reputation management running ahead of process fixes.

First-order effects

  • Little Mix members bear the direct harm — a public misidentification along racial lines on a major news portal — while the remaining MSN staff are put in the position of scrubbing coverage of their own employer's mistake.

Second-order effects

  • Publishers like the Guardian, whose journalism feeds Microsoft's curation surfaces, now have concrete evidence that automation errors attach themselves to their brands, strengthening their hand when negotiating placement and accountability terms with Microsoft Start.

Third-order effects

  • If the pattern holds across the Tay chatbot, the Start poll, and this misidentification, AI curation at scale becomes untenable without human-in-the-loop review for identity-sensitive content — and platform liability for automated editorial errors moves onto regulators' agendas.

The trend: Microsoft keeps trading editorial judgment for AI-driven curation scale, and each public failure — from its manipulated chatbot to the Start poll to this misidentification — raises the real cost of that trade.

Discussion

  • @alexhern Alex Hern on x
    The humans supervising the racist robots have been told the racist robots may try and write stories about how they're racist, and if they do, the humans are to intervene to stop it https://www.theguardian.com/ ... https://twitter.com/...
  • @jimwaterson Jim Waterson on x
    Last week we revealed Microsoft is replacing its human news editors with artificial intelligence software. A week later the robot journalist is facing accusations of racism after it confused different mixed-race members of Little Mix. https://www.theguardian.com/ ...
  • @ayshardzn @ayshardzn on x
    Last month ⁦@Microsoft⁩ fired hundreds of journalists in the middle of a pandemic & fully replace them with an AI software. It backfired as their AI cannot tell mixed-race individuals apart. 🤦🏻‍♀ ️ https://www.theguardian.com/ ...
  • @greg_jenner @greg_jenner on x
    What if I, Robot but journalism? https://twitter.com/...
  • @mathewi Mathew Ingram on x
    “Because they are unable to stop the new robot editor selecting stories from external news sites, human staff have been told to stay alert and delete a version of this article if the robot decides it is of interest and automatically publishes it” https://www.theguardian.com/ ...
  • @blackamazon @blackamazon on x
    The algorithm is just as racist as the humans and now it's gonna be the scapegoat https://twitter.com/...
  • @sigggnasty Signe Pierce on x
    This is why AI obsession sucks. If humans are struggling with the nuances of race & language, why would robots be able to get it right? The people programming these algorithms come from non-diverse backgrounds and it's gonna SHOW itself in so many stupid ways https://twitter.com/…
  • @nickgillespie Nick Gillespie on x
    For journalists who thought that pissing off woke colleagues was their biggest worry, meet your new robot overlords: “Even if they delete it, the robot editor may overrule them and attempt to publish it again.” https://www.theguardian.com/ ...
  • @tobymoses Toby Moses on x
    ‘The remaining human staff have been told to stay alert and delete a version of this article if the robot decides it is of interest and publishes it ... even if they delete it, the robot editor may overrule them and attempt to publish it again’ LOL https://www.theguardian.com/ ..…
  • @cstross Charlie Stross on x
    MSN uses algorithm to select news articles; editorial algo has racist bias; The Guardian reports it; Microsoft's response is to try to censor their reporting: Microsoft then continues with plan to fire human staff, replace with racist AI. Nicely played. https://www.theguardian.co…
  • @nickmitchell Nick Mitchell on x
    If any screenwriter is looking to pitch a Black Mirror spec script... https://twitter.com/...
  • @kellydigges Kelly Digges on x
    You know it's the future when you have to battle the racist AI who's stealing your job. https://twitter.com/...
  • @jessbrammar Jess Brammar on x
    “Staff have already had to delete coverage criticising MSN for running the story about Little Mix with the wrong image after the AI software decided stories about the incident would interest MSN readers” https://twitter.com/...
  • @lindaholmes @lindaholmes on x
    You can try to explain what satire is, or you can just wait for actual events and point at them and say “if a fiction writer had come up with this, say.” https://twitter.com/...
  • @stepickford Ste Pickford on x
    No longer science fiction. https://twitter.com/...
  • @rob_sheridan @rob_sheridan on x
    2020 update: The robots are taking over, and they're already racist https://twitter.com/...
  • @jshieber @jshieber on x
    Our episode of Black Mirror still sucks, but I will give it points for creativity. https://twitter.com/...
  • @jimwaterson Jim Waterson on x
    Staff at MSN have also been told to await the publication of this Guardian article and try to manually delete it from the website, because there is a high risk the Microsoft robot editor taking their jobs will decide it is of interest to MSN readers. https://www.theguardian.com/ …
  • @heatherparryuk Heather Parry on x
    The thing about AI is it just reproduces the biases, prejudices and structures of power within the society it emerges from and I wish this was at the forefront of conversations about AI - along with an acceptance that technology is *not* amoral. https://twitter.com/...
  • @ketanj0 Ketan Joshi on x
    I think we really need a better word than robot here. Robot assigns too much agency and capability. Excel formula? Because then it'd be clear there's no such thing as a racist excel formula, just a racist person who writes formulas. https://twitter.com/...
  • @hannahcancode Hannah on x
    Newspaper is trolling newspaper with racist robot by publishing article about how racist robot is publishing articles about racist robots in the hopes that racist robot will republish racist robot article. https://twitter.com/...