Polish Radio Station Replaces Journalists With AI 'Presenters' 25
OFF Radio Krakow sparked controversy by replacing its journalists with AI-generated presenters in an experiment to attract younger audiences. CNN Business reports: Weeks after letting its journalists go, OFF Radio Krakow relaunched this week, with what it said was âoethe first experiment in Poland in which journalists ... are virtual characters created by AI." The station in the southern city of Krakow said its three avatars are designed to reach younger listeners by speaking about cultural, art and social issues including the concerns of LGBTQ+ people. "Is artificial intelligence more of an opportunity or a threat to media, radio and journalism? We will seek answers to this question," the station head, Marcin Pulit, wrote in a statement.
Ananova (Score:2)
Hallucinated news (Score:3)
Just what we need - "news" that hasn't been properly fact-checked and is ripe for manipulation by hackers. Unless, of course, the "AIs" are just the voices, and they're being fed news by more traditional sources.
But if that's the case, why get rid of the original journalists? Oh yeah, the "younger audience". This move smacks of desperation dressed up as boldness. I'm reluctant to predict failure, but I sure hope it fails, and fails hard.
Re: (Score:3)
You could just RTFA:
That said, if you are going to replace your newscasters with AI, why go normal? Why go human at all? Why not take it fully surreal while you're at it?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If they have nearly no audience, I can't see how replacing the "journalists" (LOL) would help. Especially if they're trying to grab younger listeners. What younger folks listen to radio? What younger folks know what radio is?
This smacks of "minimal investment to continue a dying medium."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People are a liability.
I could tell you about the radio DJs in the UK of the 80's but it's not a very palatable story.
If all someone is doing is riffing for a few seconds to read out a headline or what track is coming next, it's a huge expense - what's a prime-time DJ on in terms of salary? Pensions? Plus the risk of a scandal, etc.
And do people really care if it's not a talk show, but just another radio station? No, not really.
It's go nothing to do with younger audiences. They hate AI just as much as w
Re: (Score:2)
> But if that's the case, why get rid of the original journalists?
Because they push their own agenda instead of, you know, actual news.
Journalist today, especially in the west, is literally a synonym for the left. I live in the EU and if I look at the people who work in the industry there is a massive tilt to the left. Every single day one of the newspapers here (that claims to be the 2nd largest in our country) has an article that somehow tries to make Trump look bad and can't stop yapping about global
Simpsons did it (Score:2)
Sounds like those klauns down in parlament are at it again, what a bunch of klauns
The Narrative is Presented, Regardless of Avatar (Score:2)
A better implementation (Score:2)
Use real human journalists to direct AI and review / edit the results, then have user-customizable avatars do the reporting.
If I want a couple of porn stars to give me the news while they give each other the business, or maybe a giant green space llama with a stutter... Who cares?
This trend seems inevitable (Score:2)
AI News Readers Make Sense (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
News Reading is a skill for which people expect to get paid. Good ones tend to become somewhat of celebrities and demand to get paid well. For television, AI News Readers probably aren't there yet. But for radio, you can use an AI without the risk of runaway payroll. There are many jobs for which the primary requirements are to be engaging and, if seen, beautiful. Once somebody has a following, they can demand exorbitant money. Hence part of the reason that so many people are willing to scrape through life trying to become models or actors or even radio personalities. In addition to the high costs, they also tend to get caught up in scandals that can negatively reflect on their employers. Using an AI is lower risk and has cost certainty. The job of news *gathering* is not something an AI can do very well. But to voice it on the radio seems like an ideal use of AI if the market will accept it.
Not really, I think you're missing a critical part of the news reader which is reputation. Even though they don't do the reporting they used to a lot of celebrity news readers will push back and even refuse when given a story they don't agree with, after all, it's their professional reputation that's on the line. And that's what they're really selling.
The AI news reader might be just as attractive and engaging, but they're fundamentally a mask, there's no one to hold accountable, there's no one to trust, an
All they do is read some text (Score:2)
A "presenter" is merely a person facing the camera (or simply talking into a microphone if it's radio) and reading and speaking aloud some text from a prompter. I've done it myself many times back in my college radio days. It can be a little tricky, not everyone can read a paragraph of text and simultaneously speak it without fumbling. Also you have to read with the appropriate intonation. You can't just say the words in a monotone or let it sound like you are reading. But it definitely isn't rocket science
Re: (Score:1)
Personally, I'm not a fan of what passes for modern journalism (fascist news isn't news: it's propaganda). So, they had me at "replaces journalists" but there are no scare quotes big enough for "journalist" these days.
Completely repulsive (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know about anyone else, but whenever I hear an AI-generated voice, I immediately stop watching or listening to whatever it is that is using the voice. It's just nails on a chalkboard for me. Unfortunately, this has become an increasingly common event (e.g., a lot of content producers on Youtube have started using AI voices).
Re: Completely repulsive (Score:1)
Going for gold... (Score:2)
...in the olympics of crap
While AI research shows great promise as a tool to solve hard problems, investors and managers simply want to replace people with robots. AI companies respond by offering crap generators that can quickly and cheaply generate unlimited quantities of crap. I hope there is a strong backlash, but the hype is strong and we may end up buried in crap
More of a threat, in a big way (Score:2)
Our species really is stupid and more and more I wonder if we even deserve to survive. We keep doing things to shoot ourselves in the foot, and some people think those are good things even when the outcome is overall ba