A new bill in New York would require disclaimers on AI-generated news content
New York proposes the "NY FAIR News Act," a bill requiring mandatory disclaimers, human review, and labor protections for AI-generated news content. This legislative effort sparks extensive debate on Hacker News, highlighting both the perceived necessity of guarding journalistic integrity and the potential for regulatory overreach or futility in the face of rapidly advancing AI. Commenters grapple with the challenges of defining AI's role in media and ensuring public trust.
The Lowdown
New York is pushing to regulate the burgeoning use of artificial intelligence in news with its proposed NY FAIR News Act. Spearheaded by Senator Patricia Fahy and Assemblymember Nily Rozic, this bill aims to bring transparency and safeguards to AI-generated content in journalism.
- The core of the bill mandates clear disclaimers on any news content "substantially composed, authored, or created through the use of generative artificial intelligence." This applies across various media, including articles, audio, and visuals.
- News organizations would be required to conduct human review by an employee with "editorial control" for all AI-generated material before publication.
- Internally, organizations must disclose to their staff how and when AI is being utilized within the newsroom.
- The Act also includes provisions for safeguarding confidential information, particularly sources, from AI technologies.
- Proponents argue the bill addresses concerns about AI's potential for creating misleading content, facilitating plagiarism, and eroding public trust in journalism.
- Significantly, the bill garners strong support from news industry unions (WGA-East, SAG-AFTRA, DGA) due to its labor protections, which prevent job loss or reduction of benefits for employees as a result of AI adoption.
- This legislative move comes amidst broader industry discussions and union campaigns, like the NewsGuild's "News Not Slop" initiative, aimed at establishing guardrails for AI usage in newsrooms.
The NY FAIR News Act represents a proactive attempt by New York to manage the disruptive influence of AI on the news industry, balancing innovation with the critical need for credible information and worker protection.
The Gossip
Regulatory Realities and Repercussions
Many commenters expressed concerns that the proposed bill's disclaimer requirements, similar to California's Proposition 65 warnings, would lead to ubiquitous and ultimately meaningless labels. They argued that if everything is flagged, nothing stands out, making the warning ineffective. Some suggested that news outlets might intentionally use minor AI assistance to warrant the label, or that the vague wording like "substantially composed" would create legal ambiguities and potential loopholes.
The Unstoppable March of Machines
A significant portion of the discussion posited that attempts to regulate AI content are futile, given the technology's rapid advancement and undeniable economic value. These commenters argued that trying to legislate AI content is an emotional rather than rational response, believing that the "cat is out of the bag" and AI's integration into content creation is inevitable. They suggested that regulatory frameworks will struggle to keep pace or effectively curb AI's pervasive influence.
Crafting Credibility in Content
Many participants highlighted the critical need for transparency and clear distinctions between human-authored and AI-generated content. They believed that clear labeling could foster a market for premium, human-verified news, allowing reputable sources to build trust and differentiate themselves. There was a strong desire to combat "AI slop" and potential hallucinations, with some advocating for stringent enforcement and tools to filter out low-quality, AI-produced material.
Legislative Labyrinth and Loopholes
The discussion also delved into the broader landscape of AI legislation, with some commenters noting New York's active role in drafting various AI-related laws. Concerns were raised about the complexity of navigating state-level regulations and their potential for inconsistent enforcement. Skepticism emerged regarding the actual enforceability of these laws, particularly against malicious actors, and fears that honest organizations might bear a disproportionate burden while others find loopholes.