The end of the op-ed: LA Times uses AI to counteract its own views
ADVERTISEMENT
Want to read a contrasting view on the insightful opinion piece you just found? Traditionally, you would have had to find another publication with a different political slant and search for an op-ed on the same topic.
Those days might be numbered as a new feature on the Los Angeles Times website offers an immediate rebuttal to their journalists' work through an AI assistant.
Is this the future of opinion journalism, or have we entered into a parallel universe where even rhetoric is fully supplanted by the machines?
In the LA Times opinion section is an article by Joan C. Williams, a law professor at University of California College of the Law in San Francisco.
In the piece
, Williams argues that Democrats need to understand the cultural angle of politics if they are ever to understand Donald Trump's 2024 presidential election victory.
'Democrats need to rival Trump's cultural competence at connecting with the working class, which will require changes from progressives,' she writes, as she explains that the left is failing to see the human side of the right's arguments to a broad span of American voters.
Related
Washington Post op-ed writer quits after paper refuses to publish piece critical of Bezos
Volunteer actors rail against Jeff Bezos private performance of 'You Me Bum Bum Train'
It's an insightful and well researched piece that speaks from Williams' academic perspective. Exactly the sort you'd expect from an opinion section.
What's new is a little button labelled 'Insights'. Click that and you're whisked to the bottom of the page where the LA Times gives you an 'AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view'.
In the Insights, you are told that Williams' piece 'generally aligns with a centre left point of view' as well as a summary of her points. Most intriguingly, there's a section that gives you opposing views.
There it points out that while Williams thinks Democrats should focusing on uniting cultural theories, strategists like James Carville 'urge Democrats to avoid cultural distractions and concentrate exclusively on economic messaging while others reject the premise that cultural issues are irreconcilable, pointing to Biden-era successes in manufacturing and wage growth'.
On that last point, the AI argues that 'conceding on issues like climate action or LGBTQ+ rights risks demoralizing the Democratic base and ceding ground to far-right narratives'.
This sounds like an interesting point but it's directly contrasted by Williams' own writing where she notes that on inclusive messaging, Democrats 'didn't abandon their vision of full LGBTQ+ rights, but they did shift tactics to engage a wider range of people.'
Whether the AI has fully grasped Williams' argument or not is up for debate, but most significant is the shift away from giving opinion writers a sense of authority on their topic. For many, this is part of a move to placate Trump's administration by LA Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong.
Pharmaceuticals billionaire Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong waves as he arrives in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York for a meeting with President-elect Donald Trump in 2017
Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Soon-Shiong bought the paper in 2018 and last year decided it would not officially endorse Kamala Harris for president. 'If you just have the one side, it's just going to be an echo chamber,' the medical investor said.
Going through the paper's opinion pieces today, the AI provides more opposing views.
LA Times opinion columnist
Jackie Calmes has a piece
on the parallels between Hannah Arendt's view on Nazi Germany and the current Trump administration.
ADVERTISEMENT
AI Insights suggests Calmes' piece is 'centre left' and notes that 'Trump's actions, while norm-breaking, lack the systemic violence and ideological coherence of Hitler's regime'.
Similarly, LA Times
journalist LZ Granderson
has a 'centre left' piece that criticised the Trump administration's removal of LGBTQ+ iconography and education from government bodies as a worrying shift towards un-American ideals of inclusion and openness.
Contrasting this view, the AI suggests: 'Conservative advocates, including groups behind Project 2025, contend that LGBTQ+ visibility policies promote 'toxic normalization' and conflict with traditional family values.'
While the opinion writers of the LA Times are still largely left leaning, the new AI feature is designed to platform both sides of an argument. Exactly as Soon-Shiong wanted.
ADVERTISEMENT
Back when the owner blocked the Harris endorsement, three of the six people who researched and wrote their editorials, including editorials editor Mariel Garza, resigned in protest. The other three have since left, with the last holdout, Carla Hall, exiting after writing a last column that ran on 30 March about homeless people she met while covering the issue.
Washington Post owner and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos
2025 Invision
Soon-Shiong's decision was mirrored by Washington Post owner
Jeff Bezos, who decided the newspaper
would not back a presidential candidate.
Last month, Ruth Marcus, who worked for the Washington Post since 1984,
stood down
after a row over the paper refusing to run an opinion piece that was critical of Bezos.
She was the latest to leave the Post after Bezos announced that the paper's opinion columns would no longer be a free-for-all for individual author's thoughts. Instead, it would focus on two specific themes: 'personal liberties and free markets'.
ADVERTISEMENT
Between Soon-Shiong and Bezos, there is a clear move from the billionaire-owned US media landscape to cosy up to the Trump administration. It continues a pattern seen by the major tech and social media owners, including the Bezos-founded Amazon.
Concerningly, it also highlights AI-obsessed owners' cynical attitude towards the work of journalists.
'I think it could be offensive both to readers ... and the writers themselves who object to being categorized in simple and not necessarily helpful terms,' Garza, the ex-editorials editor said.
'The idea of having a bias meter just in and of itself is kind of an insult to intelligence and I've always thought that the readers of the opinion page were really smart."
ADVERTISEMENT
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
an hour ago
- France 24
US aerospace industry anxious as tariffs loom
At the request of President Donald Trump, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick's department launched an investigation on May 1 to determine whether to impose tariffs of between 10 and 20 percent on civil aircraft and parts, including engines. The US industry those tariffs were crafted to protect swiftly let the administration know it was not interested. "Imposing broad tariff or non-tariff trade barriers on the imports of civil aviation technology would risk reversing decades of industrial progress and harm the domestic supply chain," the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) said in a letter addressed to Lutnick and obtained by AFP. The interested parties were given until June 3 to communicate their positions. The very next day, Lutnick announced that Washington aimed to "set the standard for aircraft part tariffs" by the end of this month. "The key is to protect that industry," he said, adding: "We will use these tariffs for the betterment of American industry." But AIA and the Airlines for America (A4A) trade association voiced fear that far from helping, the tariffs would end up harming US manufacturers. No fix needed "Unlike other industries, the civil aviation manufacturing industry prioritizes domestic production of high-value components and final assembly," AIA pointed out. According to the organization, US aerospace and defense exports reached $135.9 billion in 2023, including $113.9 billion for civil aviation alone. This allowed the sector to generate a trade surplus of $74.5 billion and to invest $34.5 billion in research and development, it said. The sector employs more than 2.2 million people in the United States across more than 100,000 companies, which in 2023 produced goods worth nearly $545 billion. In its response to Lutnick, the A4A highlighted how beneficial the international Agreement on Trade in Commercial Aviation (ATCA) had been by helping to eliminate tariffs and trade barriers over nearly half a century. "The US civil aviation industry is the success story that President Trump is looking for as it leads civil aerospace globally," it insisted. A full 84 percent of production was already American, it said, stressing that Washington "does not need to fix the 16 percent" remaining. "The current trade framework has enhanced our economic and national security and is a critical component to maintaining our national security moving forward," it said. For manufacturers, the potential tariffs would act like sand jamming a well-oiled machine that has been running smoothly for decades, experts warned. They would also throw off balance an ultra-sensitive supply chain still recovering from the Covid-19 pandemic. 'Competitive disadvantage' "To avoid the situation getting worse, we advocate to keep aerospace outside of trade wars," Willie Walsh, head of the International Air Transport Association (IATA), told the organization's general assembly last week. AIA meanwhile stressed that "aircraft and parts are already in high demand and have a limited supply." "Integrating new suppliers and expanding capacity is complex, timely, and costly," it warned, pointing out that finding suppliers capable of meeting rigorous safety certifications could "take up to 10 years." Delta Air Lines also argued for sticking with the status quo, cautioning that the proposed tariffs "would hinder Delta's ability to maintain its current trajectory." "If component parts incur tariffs upon entering the United States, Delta will be at a competitive disadvantage to foreign competitors," it said. "The action would also impose an unexpected tax on Delta's purchases of aircraft contracted years in advance." Delta chief Ed Bastian insisted in late April that the airline "will not be paying tariffs on any aircraft deliveries we take," adding that it was "working very closely with (European group) Airbus" to minimize the impact. Delta pointed out in its letter to Lutnick that it currently had 100 aircraft on order from Boeing, and that it was demanding that its Airbus A220s be produced primarily in Mobile, Alabama. But if the tariffs are imposed, it warned, "Delta would likely be forced to cancel existing contracts and reconsider contracts under negotiation."
LeMonde
2 hours ago
- LeMonde
Sergio Mattarella, president of the Italian Republic, the last of the democrats
When American billionaire Elon Musk attempted to interfere in Italian politics by criticizing the country's judiciary – accusing it of blocking the migration policy of his "friend," Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni – he found himself up against a man from another world, another era. An old-school European. An old-school democrat. A discreet statesman with uncontested legitimacy, a republican deeply rooted in Christian values: the president of the Italian Republic, Sergio Mattarella, 83 years old. "These judges need to go," Musk wrote on November 12, 2024, on his social network X, as an outspoken backer of the global far right. The Italian president replied the following day, without even naming Musk: "Anyone (...) about to assume an important government role in a friendly and allied country must respect [Italy's] sovereignty and cannot assume the task of imparting prescriptions." The clash between the world's richest man, whose ambitions include interplanetary conquest, and the president of an ancient nation that is a cradle of classical European culture, crystallized the confrontation between two opposing visions of politics. On one side, the affirmation of an electoral autocracy, where a victorious election is the sole condition for unlimited power. On the other, a vision of democracy based on checks and balances and legal as well as philosophical constraints. The president of the Italian Republic has stood as the guarantor of this second vision, even if it means subtly challenging the government's direction. For the far-right leader, Musk is a valuable asset; for the president, he resembles the "new feudal lords."
Euronews
3 hours ago
- Euronews
'Invest in defence now or start learning Russian later'
The US administration has appointed Lt. Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich as both the next top US general in Europe as well as the SACEUR. The appointment by Trump will be especially welcomed following media reports in recent months that the US was considering relinquishing the role of SACUER which has always been appointed by a US president to NATO. "It's a very important decision and there is relief from NATO's point of view as it's a positive sign of American engagement and staffing," a US-based source familiar with the issue told Euronews. US Army General Dwight D. Eisenhower was NATO's first SACEUR in 1951, and the role has remained with the US ever since. 'Upon completion of national confirmation processes, Grynkewich will take up his appointment as the successor to General Christopher G. Cavoli, United States Army, at a change of command ceremony at the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe in Mons, Belgium, expected in the summer of 2025,' a statement from NATO read. New targets in defence spending adopted Meanwhile, NATO defence ministers agreed to a significant surge in defence capability targets for each country, as well as moving to spending 5% of GDP on defence. They've agreed that 3.5% of GDP would be used for 'core defence spending' - such as heavy weapons, tanks, air defence. Meanwhile 1.5% of GDP per year will be spent on defence- and security-related areas such as infrastructure, surveillance, and cyber. However, the full list of flexibility has not yet been negotiated. 'These targets describe exactly what capabilities Allies need to invest in over the coming years,' NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte told journalists. The US has been pushing NATO allies to dramatically increase spending, and expects to see 'credible progress' immediately, according to US Ambassador to NATO Mathew Whitaker. 'The threats facing NATO are growing and our adversaries are certainly not waiting for us to re-arm or be ready for them to make the first move," 'We would prefer our Allies move out urgently on reaching the 5%,' he told journalists in a briefing on the margins of the meetings. Ambassador Whitaker also said the US is 'counting on Europe' to the lead in providing Ukraine with the 'resources necessary to reach a durable peace' on the continent. Mark Rutte reiterated NATO's recent warnings that Russia could strike NATO territory within the next couple of years. 'If we don't act now, the next three years, we are fine, but we have to start now, because otherwise, from three, four or five years from now, we are really under threat," he said, adding: "I really mean this. Then you have to get your Russian language course out, or go to New Zealand.' 'It's good to have continuity about the US in NATO, but with Ukraine it's a different story. I just don't think Trump really cares about Ukraine," the US-based source told Euronews. 'Trump just doesn't care about Europe – it doesn't make him richer or help him politically,' the source said. Referring to the forthcoming NATO summit taking place next month in The Hague, the source said the presence of Ukraine at the summit "will likely be scaled back", since the US will say, "they're not members' so they don't need to be there".
