Benny Neylon
Aug 26, 2017 · 1 min read

I agree with almost all you say — journalistic integrity is gone out the window, and the tugging-on-heartstrings type of reportage does nothing for me.

But right now and until we accept total surveillance of everything, everywhere, at all times, an AI report is still going to have to rely on humans for its facts — who shot the missiles, how many and who died (innocent or non-innocents) depends on whether, for example, the US Army, Syrian Government, Russian Government, ISIS, or an ‘impartial’ NGO is reporting it. It will still have to rely on chemical weapons experts or ballistics experts to investigate attacks, and uncover their biases.

As much as I too would love to see it right now, I don’t see how AI reportage isn’t a long way off, and—as it would be unwelcomed by almost anyone in the political sphere—it’s hard to see a big push for it (in fact, the very opposite) from lawmakers.

)
Benny Neylon

Written by

Writer. [of words, in case that wasn't clear]