The NYT, in addition to famously printing lots of transphobic nonsense (see the brilliant call-out at nytletter.com), also decided to print an enormous collection of synthetic (i.e. fake) text today.
Why the NYT and Kevin Roose thought their readers would be interested in reading all that fake text is a mystery to me --- but then again (as noted) this is the name publication that thinks its readers benefit from reading transphobic trash, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>>
@emilymbender
Quite a few journalists have fallen for this AI nonsense.
It’s always strange to be reminded that people who read, research, and write for a living aren’t necessarily good at it, and may never have considered how language and meaning interact.
The NYT’s transphobia has far less excuse. There’s malice in it.
I don't know why anyone would think that's strange. In my experience I'm reminded daily that journalists aren't experts in the fields they're reporting on, and really don't themselves know what they're talking about.
Heck, these days it seems to have become fashionable in #journalism to produce articles and segments where a reporter flat out says they don't know why something or other, as if their own lack of understanding is the news.
This this evening I heard such chattering come out of APM's #Marketplace and I had my daily sigh at the state of reporting in the country.
