Apple urged to axe AI feature after false BBC headline
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2v778x85yo
Have I got this right? The BBC are pushing out unchecked AI generated headlines and a reporters without borders group are suggesting Apple should pull their AI feature?
What kind of cowboy media operation would push out AI headlines unchecked to the public
Expect much more of this in the years to come.
Have I got this right? The BBC are pushing out unchecked AI generated headlines and a reporters without borders group are suggesting Apple should pull their AI feature?
What kind of cowboy media operation would push out AI headlines unchecked to the public

Expect much more of this in the years to come.
Think you’re misunderstanding what’s happened to be honest.
But Grrr BBC eh.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0elzk24dno
But Grrr BBC eh.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0elzk24dno
Dave. said:
Wait, what?!
Ai, wrong?
Noooo, can't be!
I use LLMs a lot with very thorough testing, if they are using remotely up to date models then I'm impressed that they managed to write a prompt that hallucinates this badly on something this routine without explicitly telling it to. Ai, wrong?
Noooo, can't be!
chrispmartha said:
Think you’re misunderstanding what’s happened to be honest.
But Grrr BBC eh.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0elzk24dno
They're muppets and their time will come soon enough. Meanwhile the BBC Ministry of Truth missed checking something.But Grrr BBC eh.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0elzk24dno
BBC said:
BBC News is the most trusted news media in the world
The BBC trusts itself. Not news. AI means that checks are more important than previously thought. The beeb needs to up its game, though not listening to complaints about inappropriate behaviour from 'talent' will keep it busy.turbobloke said:
chrispmartha said:
Think you’re misunderstanding what’s happened to be honest.
But Grrr BBC eh.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0elzk24dno
They're muppets and their time will come soon enough. Meanwhile the BBC Ministry of Truth missed checking something.But Grrr BBC eh.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0elzk24dno
BBC said:
BBC News is the most trusted news media in the world
The BBC trusts itself. Not news. AI means that checks are more important than previously thought. The beeb needs to up its game, though not listening to complaints about inappropriate behaviour from 'talent' will keep it busy.MrBig said:
And yet the world continues to foam at the mouth of the great coming of AI. Even if I hadn't seen Terminator or I Robot I wouldn't want it in my life.
Indeed. It seems to hover somewhere between “Lazy” and “Sinister”, I’m not sure what else it’s reliably achieved so far? News organisation? Employ journalists then. I’m sure someone will be along to explain how it will revolutionise healthcare or whatever else, and that’s great, but I fail to see what it offers wider society in a consumer-level package other than a cheap novelty act and a load of shonky crap like this. Ebay’s utterly dreadful “AI descriptions” are another fine example.
turbobloke said:
chrispmartha said:
Think you’re misunderstanding what’s happened to be honest.
But Grrr BBC eh.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0elzk24dno
They're muppets and their time will come soon enough. Meanwhile the BBC Ministry of Truth missed checking something.But Grrr BBC eh.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0elzk24dno
BBC said:
BBC News is the most trusted news media in the world
The BBC trusts itself. Not news. AI means that checks are more important than previously thought. The beeb needs to up its game, though not listening to complaints about inappropriate behaviour from 'talent' will keep it busy.The BBC is ultimately responsible for what goes out on their website, unless they add a prominent rider usually reserved for third party websites linked from a BBC webpage. That would not only be unusual, but inapplicable if it's about actual beeb content, under a beeb label i.e. headline / narrative. It may be onerous to check, but that's life at the home of the Ministry of Truth. Verily Verify! Not checking risks the self-proclaimed paragon of virtue looking like it's an amateur outfit. The BBC is hopeless, they can't act appropriately with important information about 'talent' from Savile to Hall to Edwards and points in between, and can't act appropriately with web content.
turbobloke said:
The BBC is ultimately responsible for what goes out on their website,
Unless I'm being stupendously thick here, the BBC are in no way at fault for this?The BBC published an article, which was correct.
An Apple service used AI to summarise the article, the summary stating something completely different to what the article said, and then presented it to users as if it were by the BBC.
Is that correct?
272BHP said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2v778x85yo
Have I got this right? The BBC are pushing out unchecked AI generated headlines and a reporters without borders group are suggesting Apple should pull their AI feature?
What kind of cowboy media operation would push out AI headlines unchecked to the public
Expect much more of this in the years to come.
With such a confused and inaccurate summary of what happened, you seem to be way ahead of AI in terms of pushing unchecked drivel on to the internet. Have I got this right? The BBC are pushing out unchecked AI generated headlines and a reporters without borders group are suggesting Apple should pull their AI feature?
What kind of cowboy media operation would push out AI headlines unchecked to the public

Expect much more of this in the years to come.
InitialDave said:
Unless I'm being stupendously thick here, the BBC are in no way at fault for this?
The BBC published an article, which was correct.
An Apple service used AI to summarise the article, the summary stating something completely different to what the article said, and then presented it to users as if it were by the BBC.
Is that correct?
This is my understanding too - as much as I'm not particularly a fan of the Beeb, this is not their fault!The BBC published an article, which was correct.
An Apple service used AI to summarise the article, the summary stating something completely different to what the article said, and then presented it to users as if it were by the BBC.
Is that correct?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff