AI is an information gateway. Audiences still don't want it making their news

Commenters distinguished using AI to access or process public information from using it to produce journalism. Some argued that AI can help people consume information but should not create what the public relies on as news; another questioned whether audiences would treat AI-written articles the same as reporting supported by AI-assisted research, fact-checking, editing, or terminology. Others challenged the boundary, noting that search tools already summarize news and asking whether an AI answer about a company’s stock movement counts as news. One commenter argued that people, drawing on effort and experience, remain the real information gateway.

Views of AI itself also divided. Some welcomed public resistance to AI-generated journalism, while others compared the backlash to a reaction against overexposure: AI may be impressive, they argued, but relentless hype makes people resent it. A critic countered that its everyday effects are often harmful, citing layoffs, heavier workloads, damage to artists’ livelihoods, and low-quality material flooding public spaces. Another dismissed grand claims about AI as unbelievable. One commenter further argued that people’s stated dislike of AI may conflict with their actual use of it, much as people can disavow gossip while participating in it. Across these views, the dispute was not only about AI’s capabilities, but also about who should produce trusted information and whether AI’s practical consequences justify the enthusiasm surrounding it.