When OpenAI presented ChatGPT to the world three years ago, millions pondered: “Will AI replace me at work?” This anxiety isn’t new. Human labor has long grappled with the tension between human and mechanical production forces, often interpreting advancements in technology as a threat to the former.
The concern in 2022, however, shifted from blue-collar jobs—those often at risk of automation due to technological innovations in industries like automobile manufacturing and oil extraction—to white-collar professions. Workers engaged in intellectual production initially felt somewhat insulated from this technological wave.
However, this confidence shattered with the arrival of ChatGPT.
The influx of AI has produced a deluge of data and confusion. Various studies have attempted to quantify job losses stemming from ChatGPT and similar systems. Yet, reaching concrete conclusions remains challenging. Many companies discover that while they can reduce headcounts through AI implementation, they must rapidly hire new employees for roles previously unanticipated. This pattern echoes throughout labor history: technology displaces certain jobs while creating others.
The discourse surrounding the so-called “end of work” elicits diverse opinions. Not everyone agrees that the rise of machines signifies the outright termination of human employment. Still, for many white-collar workers, the concept seemed irrelevant—until it wasn’t.
The good, old days when at least the horoscope was still written by humans. (Unsplash)
The media quickly recognized the potential for disruption. If ChatGPT can create coherent and well-documented articles in seconds, do newspapers genuinely require a team of editors? With just a couple of trained staff feeding prompts to the AI, vast amounts of news could be churned out at minimal cost.
This transition has already occurred. Some media outlets, facing financial challenges, leveraged this technology as a cost-saving measure by dismissing human editors in favor of AI , resulting in lower-quality content. The true danger lies not in the replacement of jobs, but rather in a persistent obsession with quantity over quality in content production.
Write My Next News, ChatGPT
It turns out that AI hasn’t eradicated our jobs; it has merely exacerbated existing flaws in the media industry. The relentless pursuit of content—producing without discretion—was already a troubling trend prior to ChatGPT’s arrival. Instead of acting as a remedy, AI has become an addictive, accelerating force within journalism, potentially fatal.
As a result, audiences have had to acclimate to an array of novel AI-generated experiments in news production.
One prevalent theme is futurology . When widespread blackouts occur, media outlets resort to ChatGPT, asking, “When will the next blackout occur?” The responses often manifest as sensational headlines like “What is the expected date of the next global electric blackout, according to AI” or “Neither 2026 nor 2030: When can we expect the next blackout worldwide, according to AI.” These articles often gain traction across various platforms.
The troubling takeaway is that content often draws reader interest without ensuring usefulness . For instance, AI might lack the insight to address intricate political scenarios, but this doesn’t stop media outlets from publishing stories like “Who will be the next Pope, according to the predictions of AI chatbots?” or “AI’s prediction about the next Pope.” These articles often regurgitate superficial information without any depth.
As critical events approach, media seek guidance from AI for predictions. “What team will win the Copa del Rey?” becomes an article using slightly more advanced technology than an octopus oracle’s insight. Queries about upcoming lotto numbers are common too, like “What number will this year’s big winner be, according to AI?” These types of content exemplify a detrimental trend in journalism.
A happy individual discovers he has won the lottery, thanks to AI. (Unsplash)
The keyword “according to AI” now populates *Google News*, producing stories such as “How many years will Pope Leo XIV serve, according to AI” and “The ideal job for each zodiac sign, according to AI.” These articles illustrate a troubling trajectory within journalism.
The ongoing conflict between Iran and Israel has prompted questions about a possible Third World War . Media outlets circulate articles titled “When could a global conflict begin, according to AI?,” while others explore safe havens by asking, “Which countries would be safest during a Third World War, according to AI?.” These articles reinforce the perception of AI as a modern oracle —but an oracle of little substance.
Ultimately, AI’s integration into the media has turned it into a kind of glorified horoscope. Readers are aware of the material’s superficiality, and sometimes, as in OK Daily’s case, the prompt used to generate an article is transparently revealed.
Thanks for So Much, Sam
At the end of the day, the real issue is not that AI has taken over our professions; it has allowed us to further degrade our craft. By commodifying content, generative AI creates an environment saturated with low-quality information, reminiscent of slop in journalism. The innovations intended to refine information often regress us instead.
Whether or not Sam Altman, AI’s creator, envisioned this outcome, he undeniably pushed us toward a concerning reliance on inflated and uninspired content. Current AI applications serve mainly to fulfill a demand for continuous output rather than meaningful engagement.
The immediate goal of generative AI appears to be the production of “content” as opposed to anything significantly valuable. The technology industry’s drive to capture user engagement overshadows any higher aspirations for genuine artificial intelligence.
Already circulating in your feed.
It is clear that the path of technological innovation is often influenced by market dynamics, leading to the prioritization of business interests over genuine advancements that serve to enhance our lives. For all the promises that AI holds, the quest for meaningful interaction and high-quality content seems continually overshadowed.
Image | ChatGPT
In Xataka | Some researchers believe that AI is making us less intelligent—paralleling similar claims made about calculators.
In Xataka | The comical aspect of AI’s current role in journalism resembles a “content creation machine,” rather than a nuanced tool for understanding the complex world we live in.