Darline against the machine |
It’s poetic that the same day Darline Graham won her primary to seek a full term in the United States Senate, the Wall Street Journal admitted it had published an AI-written op-ed and, based on opinion page editor Paul Gigot’s remarks about it, would happily do so again. “AI is a fact of modern life. People will use it to assist in their work and their writing, including with research, checking grammar, editing and more.”
On social media, journalists at the New York Times and elsewhere were quick to voice objections to Gigot’s leniency, but others, including one at the Washington Post, shot back at the critics: how was publishing an AI-written op-ed any different from publishing a ghost-written one?
She’s gaffe-prone. If that’s a symptom of humanity, she should not be quick to seek a cure
She’s gaffe-prone. If that’s a symptom of humanity, she should not be quick to seek a cure
Rich people, politicians, Hollywood actresses and tenured academics with enough clout to get a trade-publisher contract frequently don’t write their own books or op-eds. Elected members of Congress hardly even write their own legislation. That’s what staff or lobbyists are for.
So it’s hard to say Darline Graham isn’t qualified to be a US senator, whether or not she knows what DACA is. (For those who don’t want to ask the AI that’s taken the place of Google’s search engine: it’s “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,” a scheme that allows illegal immigrants who came to the country as minors to remain here.) Senator Graham II inherits her late brother’s staff and interest-group friends: his “office,” which matters more than the elected official these days, as the examples of more-dead-than-alive senators like (the now late) Dianne Feinstein and (only getting later) Mitch McConnell prove.
We reached the point earlier this year where a sitting senator had to........