CLARENCE PAGE: AGAINST AI, POLITICAL PUNDITRY CAN STILL DO THE WRITE THING

By Jesse Jackson, National Political Writer

Outraged workers rose up and began to destroy the machines. Fearing the worst, the WGA asked in its latest contract proposal that the entertainment industry agree not to use AI to replace writers. Not surprisingly, the industry declined, agreeing only to “annual meetings to discuss advancements in technology.” That rang alarm bells in writers rooms across the industry.

Should similar alarms be rung by us in the opinion-writing punditocracy?

We’ve seen such backlash movements rise up with varying degrees of ferocity on the heels of numerous innovations in a wide variety of industries.

Perhaps now, when not just human muscles but human brains are in a new competition, could it be artists and writers who have their turn as leaders of a backlash?

Since I, too, as a career scribe, have reason to feel competition from the possibility of artificial intelligence competing with whatev - er intelligence I try to bring to the columnists’ trade, I have delved, however cautiously into the AI world already available on the internet. Curious, I gave an audition to the pioneer AI called ChatGPT with a typical pundit question: “Should I trust Donald Trump?”

Without prompting from me, the chatbot instantly responded with an almost-scolding explainer:

“As an AI language model, I don’t have personal opinions or beliefs,” it said. “Trust is a subjective judgment that varies from person to person. The level of trust you have in Donald Trump, or any individual, depends on your own assessment of their character, actions, and track record.

“It’s important to note,” it went on, “that public figures, including politicians, can be viewed differently by different people. Donald Trump, as the former President of the United States, has both supporters and critics. His policies, statements, and behavior during his time in office have been a subject of much debate and controversy.

“When evaluating someone’s trustworthiness, it’s often helpful to consider multiple perspectives, examine their actions and statements, and review objective information and facts. This allows you to form a more informed opinion based on your own values and priorities.”

Well, thanks a lot, chatbot, but your on-the-one-hand, on-theother-hand equivocating would be dismissed as hopelessly wishywashy by most readers. Perhaps we should talk about it in the way journalists traditionally do, over your favorite beverage, whatever octane that might be.

You can write to the Rev. Jesse Jackson in care of this Newspaper or by email at: jjackson@rainbowpush.org