In recent years, the Associated Press (AP) has been using automated language generation platforms such as Automated Insights to generate news reports for earnings and Minor League Baseball. It is also reported that the AP planned to recap college sports using the same platforms. These software platforms are fed with scores, stats, play-by-play and interview transcripts, and other data to output stories in AP Style, which ought to be written by human journalists.
This is not the first time that journalism has undergone an identity crisis. As both a student journalist and software developer, I have very mixed feelings about it. I am amazed and fascinated by current technology advancements like machine learning, deep learning, and natural language processing. On the other hand, I am more concerned that such innovations may drift away from their core value, which is to make our world a better place.
It is worth noticing that automated news reporting can be beneficial for the publishing industry. In reality, resources are usually scarce. Long, tedious, repetitive reporting work can drain energy from human reporters and occupy their valuable time with filling in large amounts of quantitative data. If software platforms can substitute humans for writing these stories out of templates with fewer errors, more human resources can be focused on stories of higher priority.
From a publishing company’s perspective, prioritizing experienced human journalists for important coverage means better quality of investigations and analysis. And that’s not to say human journalists can’t be enhanced with the assistance of machines. If voice and video recognition are reliable enough, journalists no longer have to painstakingly go through recordings and sort out useful information themselves.
Former AP vice president Lou Ferrara claimed that no actual jobs have been lost or replaced by automated journalism. Slate writer Will Oremus believes that human journalists have little to fear for the foreseeable future. Without automated language generation platforms, some news may never have been covered. Yet still, all of this does not guarantee that journalism jobs are safe from the challenges of machines.
In fact, no one’s job is safe if technology advancement strays from its original cause. The rise of the machines may not decimate human civilization in the foreseeable future, but it is possible that the balance and fairness of society will take the blow. Replacing human labor with machines and robots of higher efficiency may undermine social wellbeing. In the way society currently operates, less complicated jobs are still reserved for humans, not just machines. Simply laying off human workers and replacing them with robots could cause social issues, and may even threaten the structure of society.
Single-minded commercial ambition and success is inconsiderate. In terms of journalism, there has to be demand for young journalists to cover less significant news. If a publishing company implements so-called robot journalism without considering the future of journalism, the number of veteran journalists will diminish eventually.
Assisting human journalists with software platforms is beneficial to journalism in terms of saving expenses and generating more revenue, but the focus on revenue itself is undermining journalism. Technology aims to make the world better yet simultaneously leads to a state of privileged separation, in which you can easily surround yourself with the latest technologies and forget about your origins: humans, society, and nature.
At their current stage, automated language generation platforms can only write quantitative stories instead of qualitative ones. A robot is not able to qualitatively analyze a sporting event or capture information that isn’t reflected in the data sheets. This is the importance of having a human journalist present to watch the game. While I have seen many recaps for sporting events written by human journalists that essentially rephrase box scores, interviews, and play-by-play transcripts, these uninspired reports make me unwilling to finish reading. If a human journalist fails to maintain the quality of their stories, or to add analytical elements, they should legitimately worry about being replaced by robots.
Journalism, technology, and society are all transforming. Facing opportunities and challenges brought by machines, there are core values which remain unchanged: journalism ethics, the quality of a story, and investigative and analytical abilities unique to the human mind. The purpose of technological advancement should be to benefit society, but our values shouldn’t change on a whim just because of new technology.
Reach writer Zezhou Jing at opinion@dailyuw.com. Twitter: @Zz_Jing
