Google unveils ‘Genesis’ AI tool, sparking concern

Full disclosure: This article was not written by AI, and it’s not for lack of trying. Multiple attempts were sent without success, but he continued to respond in a way that seemed inhumane, and that’s before mentioning the false claims, interesting parts of the original story inexplicably left out, and a lack of descriptive ingenuity, literary nuance, and human conceptualization. You end up with an empty envelope of a story that feels like it was rushed by someone who was too busy in TikToking to pay attention.

That said, grapevine rumors have claimed that Goggle’s new AI tool, called Genesis (also the name of the first book of the Jewish Bible, which might not be a coincidence), is able to write this article much more eloquently and convincingly. According to the New York Times, Genesis has already been unveiled to the publication’s senior executives, as well as several others, as a technological tool that doesn’t just form theories from scratch (looking at you, ChatGPT), but rather examines the latest world news and events, processes them, and provides a more robust and comprehensive output.

To assuage the foreseeable wave of worries and apprehensions, Google dismissed the idea that Genesis is here to replace human content writers, stressing that a journalist’s role in providing content, real-time reporting and fact-checking will not be affected. Rather, it is a tool to aid humans in their work when it comes to literary elements such as style, pacing, and title creation.

One who has seen Genesis up close and personal backed Goggle’s claim, saying it could be a very useful tool to serve as a reporter’s personal assistant, if you will, automating some rudimentary tasks to give the reporter time to focus on the big picture. Additionally, it has been claimed that Genesis is a “responsible” automation tool, here to prevent generative AI from replacing true human output in the industry as a whole.

On the other hand, several officials called the demonstration disturbing, saying that Google takes for granted the human effort put into creating an accurate and reliable article.

Goggle officials told Ynet they are in the early stages of exploring ideas to support journalists in their work, and that their goal is to empower journalists to use emerging technologies to facilitate their work. They further asserted that Genesis was neither created nor capable of replacing the vital role of a human in writing accurate reports, conceptualizing and writing its own article. They equated the role of Genesis with that of Gmail and Google docs.

Regardless of the precise functions of Genesis, this reinvigorates the debate regarding the role of AI in the creation of content, whether fictional or journalistic. Publications such as NPR, Insider and others have said they intend to examine how AI can be responsibly implemented in a field where every second counts.

The Associated Press has admitted that the agency has been using AI to write some stories that touch on more technical areas, such as financial reports and company earnings, though these still represent only a fraction of total output.

There are notable concerns about what would happen if unverified articles flooded the web, containing what could be an avalanche of inaccurate claims that people would take to be fact. Popular tech hub CNET experienced exactly that, letting AI check its stories, creating several stories that were blatantly wrong. CNET’s editor admitted to the problem, and every article was human-audited, if you will, to set the record straight.

Thanks to the crash, it became clear that the process of correcting all the errors ended up costing more than if humans had been solely responsible for creating the items in the first place. Although they have retired from letting AI run their stories, they still use it on a smaller scale, as some stories on CNET contain disclaimers saying they are using AI to help create multiple stories.

In the early 2000s, Buzzfeed was the hottest website on the internet, and now they have slowly started churning out AI-created articles. Lo and behold, these articles were also plagued with inaccuracies and outright lies. Last April, Buzzfeed announced that it was closing the news division. This could fuel the hypothesis that while AI is not necessarily killing journalism, it appears to be a catalyst for those who are disappearing from the profession.

Despite the grim and grim early assumptions, it looks like AI isn’t going to kill journalism anytime soon, because journalism is still invested in detecting a story before writing it, and there’s no algorithm to replace that.