There is an immediate and present danger to the media this election cycle. It’s called ‘Deep Dive.’ It’s a 10-minute chat about any topic you could imagine, all brought to you by Artificial Intelligence. No script, no human voices, no producers, no microphones. Just a nerd hanging out with a bunch of “0’s” and “1’s” programming to their hearts desire. Okay, maybe this nerd could be considered a producer minus all the talent wrangling but that is so much of the show process.
Whats more disconcerting is how real these AI voices sound. The Wall Street Journal’s Ben Cohen even said, “I can’t stop listening to them.” (It also puts the outlets ‘listen to the article’ function to shame.) It’s a part of Google’s new ‘tool’ NotebookLM. The giggles, inflection, and interaction between the two voices are not just conversational, it is human in the scariest sense (because again this is AI).
Within Google’s ‘company news section’ you can find the ‘NotebookLM Audio Overview.’ The AI voices, who can turn anything into a podcast, say in their 8 min and 25 second breakdown of the new tech, “wouldn’t it be amazing if there was some kind of AI who could do the reading for you and just tell you the good stuff.”
Putting aside these two AI voices are literally talking about themselves, think about that sentence, “do the reading for you and just tell you the good stuff.” Who is to determine what the good stuff is? We have already seen suppression of information, but this now adds a secondary layer for the press.
Yes, NotebookLM will give you citations on where the information came from, and you can provide the source material. This means if you only provide source material from Newsmax or MSNBC, your answers would look like their political agenda (right and left respectively).
Even more stressing, the overview claims someone in Florida (#floridaman) is attempting to use the AI as a “one man newsroom.” The AI anchors claim it can process city ordinances, land use documents, and meeting minutes from City Hall pressers. They can also give you answers based off of all this data. Sounds great right? I guess there is no need for reporters anymore.
This ideal of ‘citizen journalism’ powered by AI has to go. Citizen journalism is a nice idea but is not practical for any self-respecting outlet. Just look at the app/website ‘Citizen.’
They have hubs in major cities like Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington, DC, and New York. While users (citizen journalists) can upload video (which news outlets use for free) none of the claims on it are verified.
Literally anything from a Pickle attack (a false report which did populate on the site in New York earlier this year) to a car fully engulfed on the FDR drive (a true report but the app wrongly claimed there were injuries) is available and reportable to anyone at any time. But how much is accurate? I’ve yet to see a study but from my experience its less than 30%.
Citizen journalism can be very useful, when it is factual. However, using this AI powered system, which will only pull data from what you provide (and then turn it into a conversation) is not journalism. It’s taking someone’s filter bubble and enabling them to brainwash others on the left or right side of the aisle.
Fortunately, there is still some sense within the big tech companies that AI is not good for news. I asked both Gemini (Google) and CoPilot (Microsoft) “Is AI good for journalism?”
Gemini responded in part: “Overall, AI is a valuable tool for journalists, but it must be used ethically and responsibly. It’s important for news organizations to develop guidelines and best practices for AI usage to ensure that it is used to enhance journalism, not to replace it.”
CoPilot answered: “AI has definitely changed the game for journalism. It can handle huge datasets in seconds, find patterns, and even generate reports or summaries… But the flipside is, AI can’t replace human intuition, critical thinking, or ethical judgment. It’s good for the heavy lifting, but the heart and soul of journalism still rests with humans. The key is using AI as a powerful tool, not a replacement.”
What this all fails to recognize is journalism is losing entry level jobs in the process. The intern or production assistant who would go through the data, research, and be that “second brain” for a journalist are being replaced by technology. The training we once received by working closely with our experienced journalists is now dissipating, all thanks to technology.
This election cycle both parties are saying our democracy is at risk. Both parties are claiming the other is to blame for this. Yet they are wrong. Our technology has divided this country and put our democracy at risk (way more than anyone could have anticipated). It’s even changed our journalism. We have citizen journalists, activist journalists (jack-tavists as I like to call them), but to find young people who can be equally critical of the left as the right is rare. Our young people have not learned from the news men (and women) who came before us– because the jobs are not there. Instead, they are opting for creating their own podcast, their own blog, and perpetuating whatever filter bubble the algorithms have shaped for them.
When true journalists no longer have people following in our footsteps, the division, selective fact providing, and partisanship will divide this country worse than what we are seeing today. So, as we delve forward with our technological advancements, let us not forget we still need to make room in our budgets, in our careers, and in our minds to help shape actual fact-based journalists.
Krystina Alarcon Carroll is a news media columnist and features writer for Barrett Media. She has experience in almost every facet of the industry including: digital and print news; live, streamed, and syndicated TV; documentary and film productions. Her prior employers have included NY1 and Fox News Digital and the Law & Crime Network. You can find Krystina on X (formerly twitter) @KrystinaAlaCarr.
