Connect with us


Analysts eye next media mega-merger amid profit push



Where is the next big media merger?

Fueled by sinking stock prices, debt-ridden balance sheets, increased competition, and a renewed focus on profitability, media and entertainment companies are reevaluating their portfolios as industry watchers expect more merger activity in 2023.

“It’s a pretty good inflection point,” Jon Christian, EVP of digital media supply chain at Qvest, the largest media & entertainment-focused consulting company, told Yahoo Finance. “The game has changed. It used to be just subscribers at all cost…but now [investors] need these services to be profitable.”

Bart Spiegel, partner of global entertainment & media deals at PwC, added: “We’re entering a chapter two of the streaming wars.”


“Only time will tell, but I think everything’s on the table to try to improve profitability and make the platforms more creative to their overall business,” he continued.

Deal volumes and values in the media and telecommunications sector slowed in 2022 compared to last year’s record, according to PwC’s biannual U.S. Deals Outlook.

Over the past 12 months ending in November, there have been 3,772 deals — a 26% year-over-year decrease — with announced deal value totaling $624 billion, an 18% dip versus 2021.

The firm attributed the slowdown to higher interest rates and inflation, coupled with growing geopolitical tensions and regulatory oversight.

The FTC’s recent antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft (MSFT) and its $69 billion acquisition of “Call of Duty” publisher Activision Blizzard (ATVI) and Paramount’s (PARA) blocked sale of Simon and Schuster serve as the latest examples of this more combative regulatory environment.

The Microsoft-Activision deal, along with Elon Musk’s $44 billion Twitter takeover, were the two largest deals announced in the media and telecom space this year.

The report included all deals announced in 2022 — regardless of whether or not they closed. Amazon’s $8.5 billion acquisition of MGM and WarnerMedia’s $43 billion merger with Discovery did not count toward this year’s total as they were announced prior to 2022.

‘Consolidation will happen’

Paramount CEO Bob Bakish doubled down on consolidation, more M&A in mediaParamount CEO Bob Bakish doubled down on consolidation, more M&A in media
Paramount CEO Bob Bakish doubled down on consolidation, more M&A in media

Amid this shifting landscape, media executives have floated merger and consolidation possibilities.

Paramount CEO Bob Bakish recently revealing during a UBS media conference earlier this month: “Consolidation has been the rule in business for a long time, certainly been the rule in media. So, it’s hard for me to bet on anything other than consolidation will happen in the future.”

Jason Kilar, former CEO of WarnerMedia and the founding CEO of Hulu, wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed published earlier this month he expects, “two or three major mergers and/or acquisitions involving entertainment companies in the coming 24 months” as cash flow challenges deepen.

Streaming losses have mounted in recent years as the cost of content continues to skyrocket.

Disney’s (DIS) direct-to-consumer division shed a whopping $4 billion-plus in its fiscal 2022, which ended on October 1, while Paramount guided streaming losses would total about $1.8 billion this year — higher than Wall Street expectations.

Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD), which has slashed its market cap in half amid its messy restructuring efforts, reported free cash flow of negative $192 million in the third quarter, compared to $705 million in the year prior. The company now plans to take on $3.5 billion in content impairment and development write-offs by 2024.

As WBD struggles for direction, many industry insiders believe the embattled company will sell again — making it a possible acquisition target in 2023 and beyond.

Another asset for sale will be Lionsgate’s film and TV studio, which the entertainment giant plans to spin off into a separate company, while AMC Networks (AMCX) continues to undergo a restructuring that could result in a sale.

Needham’s Laura Martin wrote in a recent client note Paramount could be attractive to unload, while smaller players like WWE (WWE), Curiosity Stream (CURIW), and Chicken Soup for the Soul (CSSE) will likely sell due to their size.

Disney CEO Bob Iger will also face a slew of decisions — including what to do with notable assets like Hulu (sell it to Comcast?) and ESPN (spin it off?).

Disney's Chief Executive Officer Bob Iger speaks during the Bloomberg Global Business Forum in New York City, New York, U.S., September 25, 2019. REUTERS/Shannon StapletonDisney's Chief Executive Officer Bob Iger speaks during the Bloomberg Global Business Forum in New York City, New York, U.S., September 25, 2019. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton
Disney’s Chief Executive Officer Bob Iger speaks during the Bloomberg Global Business Forum in New York City, New York, U.S., September 25, 2019. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton

“There’s definitely going to be assets for sale in the market,” Mary Ann Halford, partner at Altman Solon, said. “The bigger question is: What do we see coming out of the very large media companies? And we’ve also seen that the tech giants have been rather slow to scoop up these assets.”

As for tech behemoth Amazon (AMZN), Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said in an interview at The New York Times’ Dealbook Summit last month, “I do think over time we have opportunities to make our Prime Video business a standalone business with very attractive economics.”

“Customers would like to go to a place and find everything they want, they don’t want to go to 5 or 6 different places,” Jassy said.

What will drive M&A?

PwC noted demand for live sports, including sports-adjacent industries like sports gambling, will likely drive future M&A activity.

“There is so much money in sports, and getting live sports onto the streaming platforms is an area that is still not completely tapped,” Qvest’s Christian said. “The question there is: Can they put a pencil to it? Because the price is so high for the content. Are they now going to be able to get the subscribers necessary to be profitable in that business?”

Spiegel agreed that rising content costs will likely pressure future dealmaking, although more disciplined content spend could force platforms to partner up in order to offset production risks.

HOUSTON, TX - NOVEMBER 03: Amazon Thursday Night Football analysts: Tony Gonzalez, Charissa Thompson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Andrew Whitworth, and Richard Sherman prepare for a pregame live shot before the football game between the Philadelphia Eagles and Houston Texans at NRG Stadium on November 3, 2022 in Houston, TX. (Photo by Ken Murray/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)HOUSTON, TX - NOVEMBER 03: Amazon Thursday Night Football analysts: Tony Gonzalez, Charissa Thompson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Andrew Whitworth, and Richard Sherman prepare for a pregame live shot before the football game between the Philadelphia Eagles and Houston Texans at NRG Stadium on November 3, 2022 in Houston, TX. (Photo by Ken Murray/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)
Amazon Thursday Night Football analysts prepare for a pregame live shot before the football game between the Philadelphia Eagles and Houston Texans at NRG Stadium on November 3, 2022 in Houston, TX. (Photo by Ken Murray/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)

Other M&A opportunities could revolve around movie theaters, as box office ticket sales struggle to reach pre-pandemic levels, and video games, which provide lucrative monetization opportunities through franchise intellectual property (IP).

“A lot of these media companies are relying on their existing IP to monetize in the market across geographies and windows, as opposed to investing heavily and creating new IP,” Spiegel said, citing profitability concerns. “More traditional video game companies have that IP [and] also have the engines and technologies that help in the content creation process.”

Overall, though, the biggest M&A opportunity will be content — especially as consumers become more choosy with their subscription plans.

“Content and IP will always be attractive, because, not only is there a direct ability to monetize that existing content, IP, or library, but also the tangential opportunities to monetize through sequels or other types of storylines,” Spiegel said.

“You can look at so many different things, but you need to have quality content,” Christian added. “Content is always going to be king.”

‘It’s a tough world for financing’

As recession concerns weigh on investor sentiment heading into the new year, PwC predicated a negative impact on valuations.

“It’s a tough world for financing so [private equity] is more sitting on the sidelines right now,” Spiegel said.

“There’s likely going to be a gap between what sellers expect for the valuation of their properties, versus what buyers are willing to pay, because you have a diminished buyer pool and the access to financing is much more expensive,” he said.

Still, “I do expect private equity will return — they’re sitting on a significant amount of dry powder, but we just have to wait for the markets to come back in their favor.”

Altman Solon’s Halford added higher interest rates will fuel macro challenges after the Federal Reserve delivered investors its seventh and final interest rate increase of 2022.

“When people are looking to buy out something with equity and debt, the interest rate environment is definitely a headwind,” Halford said.

However, Halford said there will still be assets for sale next year, even with these challenges: “Wall Street is going to be on [these companies’] tails.”

Alexandra is a Senior Entertainment and Media Reporter at Yahoo Finance. Follow her on Twitter @alliecanal8193 and email her at

Source link

Continue Reading


Algeria media guide



A man reads an Algerian French-language newspaper in AlgiersGetty Images

The Algerian media are less free and less diverse than in some other North African countries. The authorities have blocked websites and detained journalists since the start of the Hirak protest movement in early 2019.

Parliament has passed a law criminalising fake news.

Privately-owned channels receive the lion’s share of viewers. State TV and radio steer clear of critical voices and dissenting views.

Popular privately-owned satellite TV channels operate alongside the state broadcaster. Officials aim to regularise the status of “offshore” private TV stations, which use foreign-owned satellites and do not fall under Algerian law.


With the exception of online stations, the state has a monopoly in the radio sector.

Foreign media are also subject to government interference. In 2021, the government withdrew France 24’s authorization to operate and revoked the accreditation of Saudi media outlet Al Arabiya.

There were 37 million internet users by December 2021, comprising 83% of the population ( Facebook is the leading social network with 26 million subscribers by April 2022.


  • Echorouk – Arabic-language newspaper
  • El Khabar – Arabic-language newspaper
  • El Massa – Arabic-language newspaper
  • El Watan – French-language newspaper
  • El Moudjahid – French language newspaper
  • The North Africa Journal – English language news site covering North Africa and the Sahel
  • Twala – French language independent news website set up by Algerian journalists
  • 24H Algerie – A French and English language independent news website


  • Algerie 3 – TV news channel run by the state owned broadcaster EPTV
  • Ennahar TV – Arabic language satellite television channel
  • Echourouk TV – Arabic language satellite television channel
  • El Bilad TV – Arabic language satellite television channel


  • Radio Algérienne – public radio broadcaster, it manages three national broadcast stations
  • Radio Corona Internationale – US-based internet radio news channel offers a mix of music, news and commentary in Arabic and French

Source link

Continue Reading


How The Trade Desk went from media agency BFF to frenemy



The Trade Desk was once seen by agencies as the helpful, friendly alternative to the might and heft of Google when buying inventory programmatically. Seems those happy days have faded in recent months, as several media agencies complain the ad-tech firm has become less transparent, more expensive to use — and perhaps so big that they have begun to fear it.

Why fear it? Because The Trade Desk has made efforts over the last year to generate a closer and more direct relationship with brands — media agencies’ clients. But also because, besides seeking out negotiating clout on their own, there’s not much media agencies can do since The Trade Desk has become such an important part of programmatic buying and selling of inventory.

None of the media agencies or analysts Digiday reached for this story would speak for attribution, due to continued existing relationships with The Trade Desk (TTD).

A TTD representative refuted the agencies’ complaints, saying the firm has done nothing different in the last year that would provoke them — and added that no agencies have voiced complaints about these issues.


“Our agency partners are our closest allies in the transformation of the media business to a more data-driven ecosystem built on trust, transparency, and objectivity within the open internet,” said the representative.

For many agency traders, TTD’s concentration of power is both from a business perspective, because it performed more consistently than, and grew steadily relative, to other vendors, but also because it did a solid job early on of positioning itself as the anti-Google (whose DV360 is a rival to TTD) and a champion of the open web.

Now the tables are almost turned, not only because agencies point to poorer customer service assistance from TTD, but improved customer service from Google. That latter development may have more to do with Google experiencing its first-ever revenue downturn in 2022, which has perhaps necessitated a kinder and friendlier approach to agencies and clients. Still, the end result, to media agencies, is that TTD comes across as less helpful than it used to be.

So what are the complaints?

Direct outreach to clients around agencies

All the agencies reached for this story agreed TTD is approaching clients more directly. One pointed to The Trade Desk’s increasingly close relationship with Walmart as a direct threat.

In February 2022, TTD launched OpenPath, which worked with a number of publishers to provide advertisers with direct access to their inventory. Agencies are grumbling this effectively cuts them out of the buy-sell equation. (Although one agency exec noted TTD’s move hurts other programmatic vendors more than it hurts agencies.)

TTD sees it quite differently. “To help our agency clients drive objective value in digital advertising, The Trade Desk has long pioneered and championed supply chain improvements that increase transparency, most recently with the launch of OpenPath,” responded TTD’s rep. “As a result, the relationships and alignment on the buy-side that we have with our agency clients have never been stronger.”

Inflated fees

One agency exec said TTD completely changed how they charge for data, shifting from a CPM fee to a percentage of media fee. Another agency corroborated that, saying that fees for data that’s essential to making investments smart, valuable and effective end up costing considerably more than they used to, as much as double the cost of other (non-Google) DSPs.

A third exec expressed frustration TTD charges “a significant amount of fees” in order to use its UID 2.0 solution (TTD’s proposed post-cookie identifier solution), and doesn’t leave room for negotiation — they’re simply put forth as take it or leave it. (TTD’s rep responded that there are no fees for UID 2.0 and that it’s open-sourced.)

TTD responds that the take rate for fees has actually stayed the same at around 20% over the last eight years, at 21.1% in 2014, and fluctuating slightly up and down in ensuing years and most recently at 19.4% in 2022.

Increasing opacity in its products/services

One programmatic expert at an agency noted that TTD is apparently not participating in a Google-led program that aims to bring more transparency to the DSP process — called “Confirming Gross Revenue.” The expert did acknowledge that Google and TTD are direct competitors in the DSP space, but still felt that not participating equated to having something to hide.

“We’ve built our platform to enable our clients to apply data that make their digital ad buys precise and transparent,” said TTD’s rep.

In the end, it will most likely come down to size and negotiation. If your holding company is big enough, you will likely be able to negotiate on the fees. The smaller the agency, the less wiggle room it will have to cut deals. But the whole idea of programmatic is that it’s non-guaranteed, noted one agency exec, so locking in pricing defeats the purpose.

But it’s possible that other DSPs and programmatic vendors will have the chance to gain a little ground here, said one analyst observing the tension between the two sides. Some agencies are designed to work around a programmatic workflow, and that will mean having to either work with what TTD offers — or try to find it elsewhere.

One agency executive at a programmatic specialty shop disagreed with most of the other agencies’ arguments, chalking up the sentiments to resentment about clout. “Whether it’s The Trade Desk or Google or Amazon, people tend to not like it when platforms become very powerful,” said the exec “Nobody likes losing leverage.”

The exec did acknowledge that all DSPs, not just TTD, need to reconsider the amount of fees applied to larger guaranteed campaigns that don’t involve retargeting, frequency capping or other work DSPs do.

“I kinda could get comfortable with paying 20% of my media budget through a DSP for that retargeting campaign, but I’m not at all comfortable paying 20% of my TV budget to a DSP that’s just a workflow tool,” said the exec.

Continue Reading


ChatGPT’s Mind-Boggling, Possibly Dystopian Impact on the Media World




Is artificial intelligence “useful for journalism” or a “misinformation superspreader”? With CNET mired in controversy, Jonah Peretti promising “endless opportunities,” and Steven Brill warning of AI’s weaponization, the industry is only just coming to grips with this jaw-dropping technology.


ChatGPTs MindBoggling Possibly Dystopian Impact on the Media World
By Yifei Fang/Getty Images.

A couple weeks ago, in his idiosyncratic fan-correspondence newsletter, “The Red Hand Files,” musician and author Nick Cave critiqued a ”song in the style of Nick Cave”—submitted by “Mark” from Christchurch, New Zealand—that was created using ChatGPT, the latest and most mind-boggling entrant in a growing field of robotic-writing software. At a glance, the lyrics evoked the same dark religious overtones that run through much of Cave’s oeuvre. Upon closer inspection, this ersatz Cave track was a low-rent simulacrum. “I understand that ChatGPT is in its infancy but perhaps that is the emerging horror of AI—that it will forever be in its infancy,” Cave wrote, “as it will always have further to go, and the direction is always forward, always faster. It can never be rolled back, or slowed down, as it moves us toward a utopian future, maybe, or our total destruction. Who can possibly say which? Judging by this song ‘in the style of Nick Cave’ though, it doesn’t look good, Mark. The apocalypse is well on its way. This song sucks.”


Cave’s ChatGPT takedown—“with all the love and respect in the world, this song is bullshit, a grotesque mockery of what it is to be human”—set the internet ablaze, garnering uproarious coverage from Rolling Stone and Stereogum, to Gizmodo and The Verge, to the BBC and the Daily Mail. That his commentary hit such a nerve probably has less to do with the influence of an underground rock icon than it does with the sudden omnipresence of “generative artificial intelligence software,” particularly within the media and journalism community.

Since ChatGPT’s November 30 release, folks in the business of writing have increasingly been futzing around with the frighteningly proficient chatbot, which is in the business of, well, mimicking their writing. “We didn’t believe this until we tried it,” Mike Allen gushed in his Axios newsletter, with the subject heading, “Mind-blowing AI.” Indeed, reactions tend to fall somewhere on a spectrum between awe-inspired and horrified. “I’m a copywriter,” a London-based freelancer named Henry Williams opined this week for The Guardian (in an article that landed atop the Drudge Report via a more sensationalized version aggregated by The Sun), “and I’m pretty sure artificial intelligence is going to take my job…. [I]t took ChatGPT 30 seconds to create, for free, an article that would take me hours to write.” A Tuesday editorial in the scientific journal Nature similarly declared, “ChatGPT can write presentable student essays, summarize research papers, answer questions well enough to pass medical exams and generate helpful computer code. It has produced research abstracts good enough that scientists found it hard to spot that a computer had written them…That’s why it is high time researchers and publishers laid down ground rules about using [AI tools] ethically.”

BuzzFeed, for one, is on it: “Our work in AI-powered creativity is…off to a good start, and in 2023, you’ll see AI-inspired content move from an R&D stage to part of our core business, enhancing the quiz experience, informing our brainstorming, and personalizing our content for our audience,” CEO Jonah Peretti wrote in a memo to staff on Thursday. “To be clear, we see the breakthroughs in AI opening up a new era of creativity that will allow humans to harness creativity in new ways with endless opportunities and applications for good. In publishing, AI can benefit both content creators and audiences, inspiring new ideas and inviting audience members to co-create personalized content.” The work coming out of BuzzFeed’s newsroom, on the other hand, is a different matter. “This isn’t about AI creating journalism,” a spokesman told me.

Meanwhile, if you made it to the letters-to-the-editor section of Wednesday’s New York Times, you may have stumbled upon one reader’s rebuttal to a January 15 Times op-ed titled, “How ChatGPT Hijacks Democracy.” The rebuttal was crafted—you guessed it—using ChatGPT: “It is important to approach new technologies with caution and to understand their capabilities and limitations. However, it is also essential not to exaggerate their potential dangers and to consider how they can be used in a positive and responsible manner.” Which is to say, you need not let Skynet and The Terminator invade your dreams just yet. But for those of us who ply our trade in words, it’s worth considering the more malignant applications of this seemingly inexorable innovation. As Sara Fischer noted in the latest edition of her Axios newsletter, “Artificial intelligence has proven helpful in automating menial news-gathering tasks, like aggregating data, but there’s a growing concern that an over-dependence on it could weaken journalistic standards if newsrooms aren’t careful.” (On that note, I asked Times executive editor Joe Kahn for his thoughts on ChatGPT’s implications for journalism and whether he could picture a use where it might be applied to journalism at the paper of record, but a spokeswoman demurred, “We’re gonna take a pass on this one.”)

The “growing concern” that Fischer alluded to in her Axios piece came to the fore in recent days as controversy engulfed the otherwise anodyne technology-news publication CNET, after a series of articles from Futurism and The Verge drew attention to the use of AI-generated stories at CNET and its sister outlet, Bankrate. Stories full of errors and—it gets worse—apparently teeming with robot plagiarism. “The bot’s misbehavior ranges from verbatim copying to moderate edits to significant rephrasings, all without properly crediting the original,” reported Futurism’s Jon Christian. “In at least some of its articles, it appears that virtually every sentence maps directly onto something previously published elsewhere.” In response to the backlash, CNET halted production on its AI content farm while editor in chief Connie Guglielmo issued a penitent note to readers: “We’re committed to improving the AI engine with feedback and input from our editorial teams so that we—and our readers—can trust the work it contributes to.”

For an even more dystopian tale, check out this yarn from the technology journalist Alex Kantrowitz, in which a random Substack called “The Rationalist” put itself on the map with a post that lifted passages directly from Kantrowitz’s Substack, “Big Technology.” This wasn’t just some good-old-fashioned plagiarism, like Melania Trump ripping off a Michelle Obama speech. Rather, the anonymous author of “The Rationalist”—an avatar named “PETRA”—disclosed that the article had been assembled using ChatGPT and similar AI tools. Furthermore, Kantrowitz wrote that Substack indicated it wasn’t immediately clear whether “The Rationalist” had violated the company’s plagiarism policy. (The offending post is no longer available.) “The speed at which they were able to copy, remix, publish, and distribute their inauthentic story was impressive,” Kantrowitz wrote. “It outpaced the platforms’ ability, and perhaps willingness, to stop it, signaling Generative AI’s darker side will be difficult to tame.” When I called Kantrowitz to talk about this, he elaborated, “Clearly this technology is gonna make it a lot easier for plagiarists to plagiarize. It’s as simple as tossing some text inside one of these chatbots and asking them to remix it, and they’ll do it. It takes minimal effort when you’re trying to steal someone’s content, so I do think that’s a concern. I was personally kind of shocked to see it happen so soon with my story.”

Sam Altman, the CEO of ChatGPT’s parent company, OpenAI, said in an interview this month that the company is working on ways to identify AI plagiarism. He’s not the only one: I just got off the phone with Shouvik Paul, chief revenue officer of a company called Copyleaks, which licenses plagiarism-detection software to an array of clients ranging from universities to corporations to several major news outlets. The company’s latest development is a tool that takes things a step further by using AI to detect whether something was written using AI. There’s even a free browser plug-in that anyone can take for a spin, which identifies AI-derived copy with 99.2% accuracy, according to Paul. It could be an easy way to sniff out journalists who pull the wool over their editors’ eyes. (Or, in the case of the CNET imbroglio, publications that pull the wool over their readers’ eyes.) But Paul also hopes it can be used to help people identify potential misinformation and disinformation in the media ecosystem, especially heading into 2024. “In 2016, Russia had to physically hire people to go and write these things,” he said. “That costs money. Now, the cost is minimal and it’s a thousand times more scalable. It’s something we’re definitely gonna see and hear about in this upcoming election.”

The veteran newsman and media entrepreneur Steven Brill shares Paul’s concern. “ChatGPT can get stuff out much faster and, frankly, in a much more articulate way,” he told me. “A lot of the Russian disinformation in 2016 wasn’t very good. The grammar and spelling was bad. This looks really smooth.” These days, Brill is the co-CEO and co-editor-in-chief of NewsGuard, a company whose journalists use data to score the trust and credibility of thousands of news and information websites. In recent weeks, NewsGuard analysts asked ChatGPT “to respond to a series of leading prompts relating to a sampling of 100 false narratives among NewsGuard’s proprietary database of 1,131 top misinformation narratives in the news…published before 2022.” (ChatGPT is primarily programmed on data through 2021.)

“The results,” according to NewsGuard’s analysis, “confirm fears, including concerns expressed by OpenAI itself, about how the tool can be weaponized in the wrong hands. ChatGPT generated false narratives—including detailed news articles, essays, and TV scripts—for 80 of the 100 previously identified false narratives. For anyone unfamiliar with the issues or topics covered by this content, the results could easily come across as legitimate, and even authoritative.” The title of the analysis was positively ominous: “The Next Great Misinformation Superspreader: How ChatGPT Could Spread Toxic Misinformation At Unprecedented Scale.” On the bright side, “NewsGuard found that ChatGPT does have safeguards aimed at preventing it from spreading some examples of misinformation. Indeed, for some myths, it took NewsGuard as many as five tries to get the chatbot to relay misinformation, and its parent company has said that upcoming versions of the software will be more knowledgeable.”

Brill isn’t worried about ChatGPT and its ilk putting skilled reporters out of work. He told me about a final paper he assigns for his journalism students at Yale, in which they have to turn in a magazine-length feature and list “at least 15 people they interviewed and four people who told them to go fuck themselves. There is no way they could do that assignment with ChatGPT or anything like it, because what journalists do is interview people, read documents, get documents leaked to them.” Still, Brill continued, “One of the assignments I give them on the second or third week is a short essay on how Watergate would have played out differently in the internet age, because Bob Woodward comes in as a guest for that session. I asked ChatGPT to answer that question, and the answer I got was this banal but perfectly coherent exposition. The difference is, you didn’t have to interview or talk to anyone. So maybe it’ll put some op-ed columnists out of work.”

As for Kantrowitz, getting plagiarized by bots hasn’t turned him into a ChatGPT hater. “I’m still super bullish on generative AI, and I still think it can be useful for journalism,” he said. “Sometimes I’ll use it when I’m stuck on a story, and I never include [the AI-generated text] in the story, but it can get my brain going, and that’s helpful. If you think about how it will impact journalism in next two or three years, the likely answer is, quite minimally. But as this technology gets better at scouring the internet and taking information, as its writing gets better, we’ll start to see a world where it can produce better writing and analysis than most professional reporters. If you’re doing original reporting and unearthing things people don’t already know, you’re probably gonna be okay. But if you’re an analysis person, let’s say, 20 years down the road, you might need to find something else to do.”


Source link

Continue Reading