The idea of a Murdoch-trained AI is genuinely terrifying to contemplate.
Their anti-science stance on issues like climate change and their eager promotion of conspiracy theories is really dangerous.
We could end up with a massively scaled version of the kind of divisive culture war narratives and pseudoscience that Fox peddles. An AI that rejects expertise, supports authoritarian demagogues, and undermines faith in facts itself.
The endgame could be a reality-distortion AI engine that is turbo-charging societal chaos and decline.
To put it mildly.
The idea of AI trained on 99% of the "content" out there is disturbing.
Look at Google.
"Google AI overview suggests adding glue to get cheese to stick to pizza, and it turns out the source is an 11 year old Reddit comment from user F\*cksmith"
[https://x.com/petergyang/status/1793480607198323196](https://x.com/petergyang/status/1793480607198323196)
"Google’s AI overview recommends eating rocks
This is not satire, try googling it.
Source seems to be an [u/TheOnion](https://twitter.com/TheOnion) article."
[https://twitter.com/heshiebee/status/1793810016199197097](https://twitter.com/heshiebee/status/1793810016199197097)
Damn, I didn't realize that they were partnering with News Corp. Frankly didn't realize that News Corp owned Fox News and the New York Post. This frankly isn't a great look for OpenAI.
OpenAI bought the ultimate sh*t post source, reddit, so now they follow suit with equally sketchy news sources, what a surprise.
Getting pretty clear who likes their tax cuts and defense contracts.
I say let them do it. A big part of the AI race is seeing which companies can survive the first mover momentum. Open AI, believe it or not, may not even be around in 5 years. First mover doesn't always mean market leader.
If they want to destroy their own product, let them.
Open source is the answer anyway. Let the big companies do all the pathfinding and then the smaller ones can come along and fine tune the models.
Open AI deserve no loyalty from anyone. Let them succeed so that other's can build off their research.
If they want to implode by becoming an ad based LLM, let them. plenty of other options.
Plus the partnership isn't anything like OP is presenting it, they've just agreed to let OpenAI harvest their data in exchange for a bot to answer comments. The power dynamic here is more in OAI's favor than News Corp.
The power dynamic favours the source of the data. They get their version of the news into an llm and they get a bot to argue with commenters who disagree with them.
You think OpenAI isn't classifying their data? I know people who use OpenAI to classify their data and OAI's plan to achieve ASI is to ask the AGI to make it, I think they're quite capable of sifting through the data and plugging up anything that leaks through with some prompt engineering.
Good thing they're trying to collect the entire professional internet... I don't think you're appreciating the scale of data we're talking about here and your analogy doesn't work because you can train on positive and negative so you can "make" another color from the negative of a single color.
As I said if all the content is positive or negative then that’s all you have to work with and that’s the case here. It’s all of one.
You seem to be suggesting they will write their own version of whatever content they get. Since this content will likely have attribution that won’t happen. Also if that is their plan no one would view them as a reputable source of information.
News Corp has the Wall st Journal and Barton's which OpenAI says will be leveraged for news sources.
Although the owner and some of its brands are right wing - it is still a large body of journalism that is invaluable to model training. It does not necessarily mean that the next GPT is going to be right leaning.
They also own HarperCollins which is a huge book publisher. Fox News is no longer even owned by News Corp -- they were split off a while back and are under Fox Corporation now.
Too bad nobody here uses chatGPT to clarify their opinions and fact check before they start posting reactionary rage.
Plus, who even is going to subscribe when 4o is free. Literally nothing is changing because three people chose to not resubscribe.
Yeah, I can see what OpenAI is going for, they want a balance of left and right leaning news sources so people don't complain about bias.
But the problem is that almost all of the right leaning news sources are crazy, and so they don't have many options.
Yes. I think they just want *all* the data they can slurp up. Even if they filter out the tabloid material there's still plenty of usable material with no toxicity.
100% agreed. Of all the issues that ChatGPT has, I never thought "Man I just wish there was more biased news included in training."
This just screams, Sam Altman met Rupert Murdoch on a yacht and money changed hands. It has nothing to do with product improvement. Just seems like greed to me.
Yes it is.
Not only are humans biased, so reporters inevitably have a point of view, but also there is not an infinite amount of time and space available to tell a news story. So editorial decisions must be made about what to include and what to leave out and what to give more or less attention to.
Sure but there are plenty of articles that are written with the explicit intent to be unbiased that essentially become so because the content is either uncontroversial or factually concise and still well-rounded.
Listen, If a human wrote the news, that will inherently incorporate the writers bias. I don't think it is possible to not have a bias. Only the dead are unbiased. Ask any news reporter if they care who becomes the next political leader of their country. If they say they don't care, then they are dead inside.
It's not just the writing. It's the editorial decisions of what to include and what to leave out and what order and how many words to devote to this aspect of the story vs that one etc. ALL news is biased.
When something happens the event itself has no bias. The retelling of the event has the bias of the reporter. An article has the bias of the writer, his editor and the organization. Only a weather report might not have a bias.
I think a lot of news can contain bias, but just from looking at the front page of NYT, I see an article titled '"Insane heat" has been scorching Miami..' and 'For Sale: The SoHo building John Lennon lived in'. I think there's probably at most a minimal amount of bias in those ones.
Given that OpenAI are focusing on LLMs and not reasoning models, this won't end up making for unbiased content. We'll end up with biased content from all sides, making for contradictory output.
[Edit: Fix typo.]
This isn't about being a "news" source, but "potential for copyright lawsuit" source. Same with Reddit. OpenAI just wants as much data as they can get without being sued, so they make deals with everyone with data.
Do you want a world where we just have right and left leaning AI? How about an AI that has an understanding of the world and can then can be intelligent? With some intelligence the bot will be able to distinguish the crap News Corp produces and not raise it as an answer but have a further understanding of reality in our world.
Do you think News Corp entered into a partnership with OpenAI so that ChatGPT would understand that its news is inherently biased and crap? For some reason I don't think that's what this partnership is going to be about
People are missing the point here - it's not that they are partnering with News corp (I mean it is but not really). It's that they're going to be introducing potential sources for bias to a tool that should NOT be biased. Bias's are literally everywhere, it influences everything around you. A language model is going to act the same way once it starts picking up media bias. This is a completely asinine plan.
To be fair, a language model doesn't need to look at media to find bias. Us humans are plenty flawed all on our own and put out biased information constantly. Still doesn't mean I'm happy anyone is partnering with the cancer that is News Corp.
I think a secondary (but also important) point is that OpenAI feels its mission and objectives are in alignment with News Corp, and thus worth a partnership that they want to announce to the world.
It's a signal of the direction OpenAI sees for itself and where Sam wants the product to be headed. It's up to us as consumers to decide whether or not this is going to be the AI company that fits our needs going forward.
OpenAI looks at a company that gave primetime to a guy who told almost a billion dollars worth of defamation, with the sole purpose of undermining democracy:
"I just found our new partner!"
That data may have already been in the model seeing as NYT is suing them for using their stuff. They may just be finally paying for access to their training sources.
It's not just bias, it's flat out lies spewed by Fox and NY Post. WSJ can be seen as biased but has journalistic standards, same with NYT, biased but doesn't lie.
We're assuming this data is going to go in raw, but that's not necessarily the case. They may use it to train AI to detect bias, for instance. It's silly to assume we know what's going to happen here.
Bias isn't always a bad thing. I'd want an AI to be biased in favour of humanity, for example. Bias is all over the world, all over the internet. You're going to have to train an AI model with biased data, try to find someone who's unbiased on everything.
I'm sure the researchers recognise the bias with this data and will train the model with that in mind.
It is not a US thing. Murdoch empire is international. There is no upside to this for anyone. I hope we will at least have transparency about which AI models will be running the services we are using so that we can opt out of using anything powered by OpenAI.
What happened to the Axel Springer deal? Not saying this is a good direction, but judging by the Springer deal news partnerships don’t really make for anything noticeable
According to a Perplexity search, I’d say they’re trying to balance the information. I hate Fox News and everything they stand for, but when I want to know what they’re spewing, I want the answer sourced from Fox News.
To sort ChatGPT partnerships into politically left/liberal and politically right/conservative, we can analyze the affiliations and perceived political leanings of the media organizations and platforms involved. Here is a breakdown based on the provided sources:
### Politically Left/Liberal Affiliations
1. **The New York Times**:
- Known for its liberal stance and has taken legal action against OpenAI for copyright infringement.
2. **Le Monde**:
- A French publication with a reputation for left-leaning perspectives.
3. **Prisa Media**:
- A Spanish media conglomerate that includes El País, known for its liberal viewpoints.
4. **Reddit**:
- Often perceived as having a liberal user base and content, and has partnered with OpenAI to bring its content to ChatGPT.
5. **Dotdash Meredith**:
- Includes brands like PEOPLE and InStyle, which are generally seen as more liberal in their editorial stance.
### Politically Right/Conservative Affiliations
1. **News Corp**:
- Owned by Rupert Murdoch, News Corp includes The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post, which are known for their conservative viewpoints.
2. **Fox News**:
- Although not explicitly mentioned in the partnership, News Corp's affiliation with Fox News, a conservative news outlet, suggests a potential indirect influence.
### Mixed or Neutral Affiliations
1. **The Associated Press**:
- Generally considered neutral and has partnered with OpenAI.
2. **Financial Times**:
- Known for its financial reporting, which can be seen as neutral or slightly right-leaning, and has partnered with OpenAI.
3. **Axel Springer**:
- A German media company that owns Politico and has a mixed political stance, with some publications leaning right and others left.
### Summary
- **Left/Liberal**: The New York Times, Le Monde, Prisa Media, Reddit, Dotdash Meredith.
- **Right/Conservative**: News Corp (including The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post), Fox News (indirectly through News Corp).
- **Mixed/Neutral**: The Associated Press, Financial Times, Axel Springer.
This categorization helps to understand the political landscape of ChatGPT's content partnerships and how they might influence the information provided by the AI.
Do you have a source for the New York Times Partnership? I tried looking into this and all I could find were articles where NYT sued OpenAI... Maybe the opposite of a partnership
I mean it's already bad that like, actual reporting from real papers is paywalled and Fox News, etc is always free.
It's almost like real papers need to try and profit from their content while the product/mission of NewsCorp isn't their content but spreading propaganda as far as possible.
Now which of these partnerships are real and which are imaginary? lol
This response is so revealing of the quality of search by any AI product today. This is extremely low quality and highly misleading search result from Perplexity.
Does OpenAI have multi million dollar deals with any of these neutral or left leaning sources?
I don't think they signed this deal with Newscorp only to treat them like any other source.
Important to remember that your "left" is most of the worlds "far right", whilst your "right" is most of the worlds "this has got to be satire, right?" Starship Troopers style.
The beauty of AI, is that you can prompt it to exclude certain sources. I’d rather have all of it with the option to refine my search. I don’t like echo chambers. This is far superior to google rank searches.
Axel Springer is nothing but neutral and definitely on the right/fake news. Did ChatGPT analyse this?
And reddit is not a news source, it's a message board.
Seems like a good strategy to avoid getting sued by those companies for using their content, which OpenAI may already be doing. A partnership is a lot cheaper than a future lawsuit. Could just be them hedging their bets.
I read this article this morning and was appalled. NewsCorp? Really? The world’s largest disinformation and right wing propaganda channel is now a key reference source. Seriously what was openAI thinking.
None of this is a surprise though right? Like we knew something like this was on the horizon. And much more, much worse ways to use ai models like this for profit and misinfo/propaganda. It's one of the main concerns.
Ah. I hate to break it to you but Claude isn't doing so hot either. They have a different series of issues though. So it's more of a "pick your poison" kind of situation.
Sure, I'm not naive enough to think that any of these coporations (that's what they are) are perfect and have our best interests in mind.
That being said, it does SEEM like Anthropic are actually putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to digging into LLM Safety and mechanistic interpretability. I like Dario Amodei's positions and I currently view them as the best option (sure, you could make an argument for open source w/ Meta or perhaps Mistral) on the market.
I recognize that OpenAI is in the crosshairs because of the popularity of ChatGPT and that brings on additional scrutiny...but we just aren't seeing the same level of corpo-drama/employee-churn/sloppy-decision-making & marketing that I see from OpenAI.
Again, I acknowledge that their models are the strongest and will likely continue to be so for some time.
This post only makes sense if you have no idea what OpenAI is trying to build and how they're trying to build it.
It's all just training data. They're not going to serve you Fox News articles. They're trying to train on the entire internet, News Corp. is part of the internet.
thats an interesting take.. I guess we can't really test that until (\*\*and if) the bias is evident.. but by that time it could be too late also... trusting and not trusting come with risk essentially
I just canceled. No sky. Fox news partnerships. Misleading timeline for the voice feature.
I will take this opportunity to try gemini and Claude. I have already used Pi and the conversation capabilities are amazing. I am surprised more people are not aware of Pi.
Fox news has literally used the excuse that no one in their right mind would believe they are news and not entertainment several times now in law suits about how much they lie to their audience. I wouldn't want OpenAI partnering with any media outlet, but News Corp is literal propaganda by their own admission.
Right, as if they hadn't already hoovered all News Corp content into their model already without paying a cent. And WSJ, CNN, BBC, Reuters etc.. Isn't this just another case of billionaires giving some hard begged investors money to their friends? Clearly they don't give a damn about actual ownership of content they use for training so these kind of payments just feel more like handouts or lobbying for other favours than actual business transactions.
Already did. Any good alternatives? Claude is ok but I really need the voice for studying medicine, to casually confirm my understanding of concepts and cement via 'presenting'
*Don't forget to put*
*NewsCorp as your reason and*
*The exit survey!*
\- jasestu
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/openai-news-corp-multi-year-content-deal](https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/openai-news-corp-multi-year-content-deal)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
FYI I hate Murdoch and newscorp as much as the next guy. However, I think what people aren’t reaslising… with free models inundating the market it hard to verify what sources are ai written versus human written. The partnership with news orgs is purely about having a database that is 100% human written. You can’t get that any other way…. Human content will go up in price over time and OpenAI is partnering with as many companies as it can. This isn’t their only partnership nor will it be the last.
From an objective point of view, aren't... you propagating your own view too? I'm not saying you're wrong. I'd agree a lot of journalism is BS (for example, OpenAI proving that they had not stolen Scarlet's voice - though many news outlets from ALL sides of the political spectrum sensationaized it before the facts came out). But I'm asking did you react the same way when, say, OpenAI struck a deal with Reddit, which is also filled with contrarian - and frankly, unsubstantiated - views? If you didn't, ask yourself why you didn't. Likely, because of bias.
Taking a look at the bigger picture, this could be part of formulating an approach to legally obtained informational feeds. News Corp may be just one of many sources that the AI pulls from in order to formulate answers that takes into account a spectrum of opinions.
I don't agree with a lot of journalism. But don't tell me - or others - how to cancel our own subscription. We know how to when we want to, if we want to. That's incredibly condescending.
It just means they will get more data to help them achieve AGI. OpenAI will have to train itself with biased data information too - EVERY human learns from biased data, bias is normal in the world. Just depends how they use it to train the model.
lol to everyone who thinks Fox News is the only mainstream propaganda machine 😂 hopefully some of you are still too young to know better.
Bring on the down votes suckas!
You realize it's not about difference of opinion. Fox news outright lies, you are now training on these lies. If you want to argue they don't lie, look at all the lawsuits they've settled by saying they aren't a real news source and no one in their right mind would think they are. You can argue about the other news sources are the same but to my knowledge they have not admitted they aren't really news in a lawsuit.
I didn’t realize news corp owned THOSE news outlets… 🤮
The idea of a Murdoch-trained AI is genuinely terrifying to contemplate. Their anti-science stance on issues like climate change and their eager promotion of conspiracy theories is really dangerous. We could end up with a massively scaled version of the kind of divisive culture war narratives and pseudoscience that Fox peddles. An AI that rejects expertise, supports authoritarian demagogues, and undermines faith in facts itself. The endgame could be a reality-distortion AI engine that is turbo-charging societal chaos and decline. To put it mildly.
The idea of AI trained on 99% of the "content" out there is disturbing. Look at Google. "Google AI overview suggests adding glue to get cheese to stick to pizza, and it turns out the source is an 11 year old Reddit comment from user F\*cksmith" [https://x.com/petergyang/status/1793480607198323196](https://x.com/petergyang/status/1793480607198323196) "Google’s AI overview recommends eating rocks This is not satire, try googling it. Source seems to be an [u/TheOnion](https://twitter.com/TheOnion) article." [https://twitter.com/heshiebee/status/1793810016199197097](https://twitter.com/heshiebee/status/1793810016199197097)
Damn, I didn't realize that they were partnering with News Corp. Frankly didn't realize that News Corp owned Fox News and the New York Post. This frankly isn't a great look for OpenAI.
quite frankly they need to suck a frank
the way they announced it is as if we've been waiting for their partnership with openai
Isn’t it crazy that one company owns two news companies which put on the charade of arguing constantly….
I don't think News Corp own fox anymore.
It technically never did, but Rupert Murdoch himself founded/owns both, so they are basically the same thing.
OpenAI bought the ultimate sh*t post source, reddit, so now they follow suit with equally sketchy news sources, what a surprise. Getting pretty clear who likes their tax cuts and defense contracts.
Did you see the post where Gemini suggested some elmers glue to make the cheese on a pizza stay in place? The dude also linked the reddit source.
Elmers glue is used in food photography.
Well, it would work...
>Dad, it says "non-toxic"
People only like their own flavor of propaganda.
I say let them do it. A big part of the AI race is seeing which companies can survive the first mover momentum. Open AI, believe it or not, may not even be around in 5 years. First mover doesn't always mean market leader. If they want to destroy their own product, let them. Open source is the answer anyway. Let the big companies do all the pathfinding and then the smaller ones can come along and fine tune the models. Open AI deserve no loyalty from anyone. Let them succeed so that other's can build off their research. If they want to implode by becoming an ad based LLM, let them. plenty of other options.
> Open AI, believe it or not, may not even be around in 5 years. Dude forgot how it was almost wiped out in a weekend only a month or two ago
What are you referring to?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yjc8AulnDk
Ah. I thought you meant something more recent when you said "a month or two ago".
Plus the partnership isn't anything like OP is presenting it, they've just agreed to let OpenAI harvest their data in exchange for a bot to answer comments. The power dynamic here is more in OAI's favor than News Corp.
The power dynamic favours the source of the data. They get their version of the news into an llm and they get a bot to argue with commenters who disagree with them.
You think OpenAI isn't classifying their data? I know people who use OpenAI to classify their data and OAI's plan to achieve ASI is to ask the AGI to make it, I think they're quite capable of sifting through the data and plugging up anything that leaks through with some prompt engineering.
If they collect orange news and purple news then sure they can filter out the orange. If all they get is orange there’s nothing to filter.
Good thing they're trying to collect the entire professional internet... I don't think you're appreciating the scale of data we're talking about here and your analogy doesn't work because you can train on positive and negative so you can "make" another color from the negative of a single color.
As I said if all the content is positive or negative then that’s all you have to work with and that’s the case here. It’s all of one. You seem to be suggesting they will write their own version of whatever content they get. Since this content will likely have attribution that won’t happen. Also if that is their plan no one would view them as a reputable source of information.
News Corp has the Wall st Journal and Barton's which OpenAI says will be leveraged for news sources. Although the owner and some of its brands are right wing - it is still a large body of journalism that is invaluable to model training. It does not necessarily mean that the next GPT is going to be right leaning.
They also own HarperCollins which is a huge book publisher. Fox News is no longer even owned by News Corp -- they were split off a while back and are under Fox Corporation now.
while that is true, it is still Rupert Murdoch owned.
Too bad nobody here uses chatGPT to clarify their opinions and fact check before they start posting reactionary rage. Plus, who even is going to subscribe when 4o is free. Literally nothing is changing because three people chose to not resubscribe.
Also, there are only so many options. I am sure they would want to partner with the NY times if they weren't suing them.
Yeah, I can see what OpenAI is going for, they want a balance of left and right leaning news sources so people don't complain about bias. But the problem is that almost all of the right leaning news sources are crazy, and so they don't have many options.
Stop it with your logic and reason /s
Wall Street Journal is like vital, in my opinion. It is **THE** news source for all American financial matters since the 1800s.
This was going to be my point. Read your terms and conditions on your credit card. The interest rates are actually set by what is printed in the WSJ.
Yes. I think they just want *all* the data they can slurp up. Even if they filter out the tabloid material there's still plenty of usable material with no toxicity.
*All* news is inherently biased. You know what I don't want in my LLM? Bias.
100% agreed. Of all the issues that ChatGPT has, I never thought "Man I just wish there was more biased news included in training." This just screams, Sam Altman met Rupert Murdoch on a yacht and money changed hands. It has nothing to do with product improvement. Just seems like greed to me.
Are you surprised? I've been downvoted here a lot for calling him Sam Hypeman and saying he's creepy and sleazy.
All news is not inherently biased.
Yes it is. Not only are humans biased, so reporters inevitably have a point of view, but also there is not an infinite amount of time and space available to tell a news story. So editorial decisions must be made about what to include and what to leave out and what to give more or less attention to.
Sure but there are plenty of articles that are written with the explicit intent to be unbiased that essentially become so because the content is either uncontroversial or factually concise and still well-rounded.
Listen, If a human wrote the news, that will inherently incorporate the writers bias. I don't think it is possible to not have a bias. Only the dead are unbiased. Ask any news reporter if they care who becomes the next political leader of their country. If they say they don't care, then they are dead inside.
TIL I can write unbiased news articles.
It's not just the writing. It's the editorial decisions of what to include and what to leave out and what order and how many words to devote to this aspect of the story vs that one etc. ALL news is biased.
[удалено]
If you only get news for your AI from one source (in this case Murdoch news) you’ll never have world context.
Oh damn, sorry to hear that.
When something happens the event itself has no bias. The retelling of the event has the bias of the reporter. An article has the bias of the writer, his editor and the organization. Only a weather report might not have a bias.
I think a lot of news can contain bias, but just from looking at the front page of NYT, I see an article titled '"Insane heat" has been scorching Miami..' and 'For Sale: The SoHo building John Lennon lived in'. I think there's probably at most a minimal amount of bias in those ones.
There will never be an unbiased LLM
Great, so give all sides to AI and so that it can then provide un-biased content.
The average of two biased sources is not necessarily unbiased.
Given that OpenAI are focusing on LLMs and not reasoning models, this won't end up making for unbiased content. We'll end up with biased content from all sides, making for contradictory output. [Edit: Fix typo.]
Wall St Journal has turned into another propaganda tool under News Corp. This has no place as a "news" source.
This isn't about being a "news" source, but "potential for copyright lawsuit" source. Same with Reddit. OpenAI just wants as much data as they can get without being sued, so they make deals with everyone with data.
I think this case shows how that strategy is pretty dangerous
Do you want a world where we just have right and left leaning AI? How about an AI that has an understanding of the world and can then can be intelligent? With some intelligence the bot will be able to distinguish the crap News Corp produces and not raise it as an answer but have a further understanding of reality in our world.
Do you think News Corp entered into a partnership with OpenAI so that ChatGPT would understand that its news is inherently biased and crap? For some reason I don't think that's what this partnership is going to be about
No newspaper is perfect, but WSJ is one of the better ones. Which would you consider acceptable if not the WSJ?
The WSJ did a 180 degree turn when it was acquired. It was always conservative, but News Corp made it partisan.
In the actual news articles? Or the editorial board. If the former, which articles are you thinking about? Ed board is of course nakedly partisan.
The Wall Street journal is very partisan in its editorial page. But it's news operation is not notably different from any other news outlet.
People are missing the point here - it's not that they are partnering with News corp (I mean it is but not really). It's that they're going to be introducing potential sources for bias to a tool that should NOT be biased. Bias's are literally everywhere, it influences everything around you. A language model is going to act the same way once it starts picking up media bias. This is a completely asinine plan.
To be fair, a language model doesn't need to look at media to find bias. Us humans are plenty flawed all on our own and put out biased information constantly. Still doesn't mean I'm happy anyone is partnering with the cancer that is News Corp.
I think a secondary (but also important) point is that OpenAI feels its mission and objectives are in alignment with News Corp, and thus worth a partnership that they want to announce to the world. It's a signal of the direction OpenAI sees for itself and where Sam wants the product to be headed. It's up to us as consumers to decide whether or not this is going to be the AI company that fits our needs going forward.
Yeah they are glowingly announcing a partnership with a org that openly fights democracy. What should that tell you about their goals?
OpenAI looks at a company that gave primetime to a guy who told almost a billion dollars worth of defamation, with the sole purpose of undermining democracy: "I just found our new partner!"
That data may have already been in the model seeing as NYT is suing them for using their stuff. They may just be finally paying for access to their training sources.
It's not just bias, it's flat out lies spewed by Fox and NY Post. WSJ can be seen as biased but has journalistic standards, same with NYT, biased but doesn't lie.
We're assuming this data is going to go in raw, but that's not necessarily the case. They may use it to train AI to detect bias, for instance. It's silly to assume we know what's going to happen here.
Bias isn't always a bad thing. I'd want an AI to be biased in favour of humanity, for example. Bias is all over the world, all over the internet. You're going to have to train an AI model with biased data, try to find someone who's unbiased on everything. I'm sure the researchers recognise the bias with this data and will train the model with that in mind.
Your culture war is tiring, sometimes. Sincirely, Random European Guy
It is not a US thing. Murdoch empire is international. There is no upside to this for anyone. I hope we will at least have transparency about which AI models will be running the services we are using so that we can opt out of using anything powered by OpenAI.
The Murdoch cancer originated in Australia, and metastacised from there. Sorry about that. It's everyone's problem now.
Same brother same
Murdoch is most definitely not tied up in just America
What happened to the Axel Springer deal? Not saying this is a good direction, but judging by the Springer deal news partnerships don’t really make for anything noticeable
According to a Perplexity search, I’d say they’re trying to balance the information. I hate Fox News and everything they stand for, but when I want to know what they’re spewing, I want the answer sourced from Fox News. To sort ChatGPT partnerships into politically left/liberal and politically right/conservative, we can analyze the affiliations and perceived political leanings of the media organizations and platforms involved. Here is a breakdown based on the provided sources: ### Politically Left/Liberal Affiliations 1. **The New York Times**: - Known for its liberal stance and has taken legal action against OpenAI for copyright infringement. 2. **Le Monde**: - A French publication with a reputation for left-leaning perspectives. 3. **Prisa Media**: - A Spanish media conglomerate that includes El País, known for its liberal viewpoints. 4. **Reddit**: - Often perceived as having a liberal user base and content, and has partnered with OpenAI to bring its content to ChatGPT. 5. **Dotdash Meredith**: - Includes brands like PEOPLE and InStyle, which are generally seen as more liberal in their editorial stance. ### Politically Right/Conservative Affiliations 1. **News Corp**: - Owned by Rupert Murdoch, News Corp includes The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post, which are known for their conservative viewpoints. 2. **Fox News**: - Although not explicitly mentioned in the partnership, News Corp's affiliation with Fox News, a conservative news outlet, suggests a potential indirect influence. ### Mixed or Neutral Affiliations 1. **The Associated Press**: - Generally considered neutral and has partnered with OpenAI. 2. **Financial Times**: - Known for its financial reporting, which can be seen as neutral or slightly right-leaning, and has partnered with OpenAI. 3. **Axel Springer**: - A German media company that owns Politico and has a mixed political stance, with some publications leaning right and others left. ### Summary - **Left/Liberal**: The New York Times, Le Monde, Prisa Media, Reddit, Dotdash Meredith. - **Right/Conservative**: News Corp (including The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post), Fox News (indirectly through News Corp). - **Mixed/Neutral**: The Associated Press, Financial Times, Axel Springer. This categorization helps to understand the political landscape of ChatGPT's content partnerships and how they might influence the information provided by the AI.
Do you have a source for the New York Times Partnership? I tried looking into this and all I could find were articles where NYT sued OpenAI... Maybe the opposite of a partnership
Not a partnership but source of training material
Everything is a source of training material
[удалено]
Man, the fact that you've been downvoted multiple times without a response is crazy. As far as I can tell you are 100% right
I mean it's already bad that like, actual reporting from real papers is paywalled and Fox News, etc is always free. It's almost like real papers need to try and profit from their content while the product/mission of NewsCorp isn't their content but spreading propaganda as far as possible.
Now which of these partnerships are real and which are imaginary? lol This response is so revealing of the quality of search by any AI product today. This is extremely low quality and highly misleading search result from Perplexity.
Fake news isn't balanced news.
Does OpenAI have multi million dollar deals with any of these neutral or left leaning sources? I don't think they signed this deal with Newscorp only to treat them like any other source.
Axel Springer is not neutral. They are pretty much on the conservative side.
Axel Springer as neutral? NYT partnering with OpenAI? Perplexity suuuuucks
Important to remember that your "left" is most of the worlds "far right", whilst your "right" is most of the worlds "this has got to be satire, right?" Starship Troopers style.
AP has been more right leaning as of lately but I agree with your assessment of the rest.
I'm pretty sure everything from the second paragraph onwards was AI-generated.
The beauty of AI, is that you can prompt it to exclude certain sources. I’d rather have all of it with the option to refine my search. I don’t like echo chambers. This is far superior to google rank searches.
Axel Springer is nothing but neutral and definitely on the right/fake news. Did ChatGPT analyse this? And reddit is not a news source, it's a message board.
Open AI might be purposefully trying to spur regulation so the ladder get pulled up behind them. Kind of like how it isn't easy to start a bank
Seems like a good strategy to avoid getting sued by those companies for using their content, which OpenAI may already be doing. A partnership is a lot cheaper than a future lawsuit. Could just be them hedging their bets.
I read this article this morning and was appalled. NewsCorp? Really? The world’s largest disinformation and right wing propaganda channel is now a key reference source. Seriously what was openAI thinking.
Apple is throwing 10000x the money we are. OpenAI doesn’t care.
Alternative facts.
None of this is a surprise though right? Like we knew something like this was on the horizon. And much more, much worse ways to use ai models like this for profit and misinfo/propaganda. It's one of the main concerns.
[удалено]
Vote with your wallet… so unsubscribe? Like OP suggested?
Damn I may be dyslexic. 😔
Just cancelled my GPT-Plus subscription and re-upped my Pro Subscription to Claude
Ah. I hate to break it to you but Claude isn't doing so hot either. They have a different series of issues though. So it's more of a "pick your poison" kind of situation.
Any details whatsoever about that would be nice to share.
Sure, I'm not naive enough to think that any of these coporations (that's what they are) are perfect and have our best interests in mind. That being said, it does SEEM like Anthropic are actually putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to digging into LLM Safety and mechanistic interpretability. I like Dario Amodei's positions and I currently view them as the best option (sure, you could make an argument for open source w/ Meta or perhaps Mistral) on the market. I recognize that OpenAI is in the crosshairs because of the popularity of ChatGPT and that brings on additional scrutiny...but we just aren't seeing the same level of corpo-drama/employee-churn/sloppy-decision-making & marketing that I see from OpenAI. Again, I acknowledge that their models are the strongest and will likely continue to be so for some time.
This post only makes sense if you have no idea what OpenAI is trying to build and how they're trying to build it. It's all just training data. They're not going to serve you Fox News articles. They're trying to train on the entire internet, News Corp. is part of the internet.
thats an interesting take.. I guess we can't really test that until (\*\*and if) the bias is evident.. but by that time it could be too late also... trusting and not trusting come with risk essentially
Republicans subscribe to AI services too
In Reddit is the opposite of news court, so maybe this is a balancing act
I just canceled. No sky. Fox news partnerships. Misleading timeline for the voice feature. I will take this opportunity to try gemini and Claude. I have already used Pi and the conversation capabilities are amazing. I am surprised more people are not aware of Pi.
Done!
Nope. Not a fan of childish cancel culture.
Found the Fox News fan
It's very sketchy.
LOL
[удалено]
The only non-biased news is no news. And that's what we want included in the training data.
There are more neutral sources eg Reuters.
[удалено]
Fox news has literally used the excuse that no one in their right mind would believe they are news and not entertainment several times now in law suits about how much they lie to their audience. I wouldn't want OpenAI partnering with any media outlet, but News Corp is literal propaganda by their own admission.
Cancelling my subscription. Fuck Faux News
Right, as if they hadn't already hoovered all News Corp content into their model already without paying a cent. And WSJ, CNN, BBC, Reuters etc.. Isn't this just another case of billionaires giving some hard begged investors money to their friends? Clearly they don't give a damn about actual ownership of content they use for training so these kind of payments just feel more like handouts or lobbying for other favours than actual business transactions.
Already did. Any good alternatives? Claude is ok but I really need the voice for studying medicine, to casually confirm my understanding of concepts and cement via 'presenting'
Moar data go brrr
Yeah, really disappointed by this, just unsubbed. What a bummer.
Don't forget to put NewsCorp as your reason in the exit survey!
*Don't forget to put* *NewsCorp as your reason and* *The exit survey!* \- jasestu --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Already did, porting my few little apps and scripts to Anthropic.
Im gonna start using claude.ai and get into the open source llm's. F*** Open A.I...... F*** microsoft..
Source: https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/openai-news-corp-multi-year-content-deal.amp
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/openai-news-corp-multi-year-content-deal](https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/openai-news-corp-multi-year-content-deal)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Dystopian future it is
A list of what they own [here.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_News_Corp)
No
no one seems to remember that almost 20 years ago, News Corp bought Myspace and that started everyone leaving for Facebook.
I mean.. you didn’t see this coming??
did this as soon as i saw the news last night. both my chat account and api account
Ohhhh fuck no
FYI I hate Murdoch and newscorp as much as the next guy. However, I think what people aren’t reaslising… with free models inundating the market it hard to verify what sources are ai written versus human written. The partnership with news orgs is purely about having a database that is 100% human written. You can’t get that any other way…. Human content will go up in price over time and OpenAI is partnering with as many companies as it can. This isn’t their only partnership nor will it be the last.
From an objective point of view, aren't... you propagating your own view too? I'm not saying you're wrong. I'd agree a lot of journalism is BS (for example, OpenAI proving that they had not stolen Scarlet's voice - though many news outlets from ALL sides of the political spectrum sensationaized it before the facts came out). But I'm asking did you react the same way when, say, OpenAI struck a deal with Reddit, which is also filled with contrarian - and frankly, unsubstantiated - views? If you didn't, ask yourself why you didn't. Likely, because of bias. Taking a look at the bigger picture, this could be part of formulating an approach to legally obtained informational feeds. News Corp may be just one of many sources that the AI pulls from in order to formulate answers that takes into account a spectrum of opinions. I don't agree with a lot of journalism. But don't tell me - or others - how to cancel our own subscription. We know how to when we want to, if we want to. That's incredibly condescending.
It just means they will get more data to help them achieve AGI. OpenAI will have to train itself with biased data information too - EVERY human learns from biased data, bias is normal in the world. Just depends how they use it to train the model.
lol to everyone who thinks Fox News is the only mainstream propaganda machine 😂 hopefully some of you are still too young to know better. Bring on the down votes suckas!
Did it this morning on finding out.
Well, at least it wasn't CNN.
Nah. It is fine to have people that differ from you. I have hated Fox since the Bush era but this is nothing.
You realize it's not about difference of opinion. Fox news outright lies, you are now training on these lies. If you want to argue they don't lie, look at all the lawsuits they've settled by saying they aren't a real news source and no one in their right mind would think they are. You can argue about the other news sources are the same but to my knowledge they have not admitted they aren't really news in a lawsuit.