《Current Affairs》杂志禁止AI生成内容
美国杂志《Current Affairs》宣布在其新版工会合同中写入严格的“反AI”条款:杂志不刊登任何AI生成的文字,也不使用AI生成的插图,以保证读者读到的是人类写作与人类艺术。主编Nathan J. Robinson撰文称,此举是为直接对抗媒体的“slop化”,并批评部分新闻机构争相用AI替代记者、甚至为AI代写的稿件辩护。文章同时说明,员工仍可用AI工具协助查资料,或让画师用工具添加纹理、改颜色等,但技术必须是帮助而非取代劳动者。
一家小型杂志的政策影响有限,但它加入了出版与创意行业围绕AI替代人类创作和就业的争论。

We urgently need to protect human thought and creativity. Our magazine is committing itself to remaining handmade. Ensure every publication you support does the same.
Iam proud to say that as part of our new union contract, Current Affairs recently adopted one of the strictest anti-AI policies in the publishing industry. No text that is AI-generated may be published in our magazine. No AI-generated art may be used as a Current Affairs illustration. When you read Current Affairs, you are going to be reading the thoughts of a human, and seeing the results of human artistry.
We’re adopting this policy because we want to directly challenge the slopification of media. Newsrooms across the country are rushing to embrace AI and replace actual writers, public opinion be damned. The CEO of Business Insider, for instance, has said his publication is “all in on AI” (which is becoming an annoyingly common slogan) and shamelessly publishes AI-written content. At least they’re honest about it. Some publications have deliberately tricked people; Sports Illustrated was caught publishing AI-written pieces by nonexistent journalists. Guest op-eds in all of the major newspapers have been found to be either partly or wholly written by AI. Sometimes publishing this work can happen inadvertently; here at Current Affairs, we have had plenty of freelance submissions that use suspicious numbers of em-dashes and “this is not an X, it’s a Y” sentences. (We can’t promise that nothing will ever slip through the cracks, but we’re vigilant!) Astonishingly, though, some editors have actually defended publishing the pieces even when writers have been caught. The Wall Street Journal published an op-ed from a hedge fund billionaire, Stan Druckenmiller, that turned out to have been AI-generated (probably because billionaires are inarticulate due to a lifetime of never having to craft arguments to persuade the yes-men around them), but the paper defended publishing the piece, since it reflected the billionaire’s genuine opinion.
#Current Affairs#ChatGPT#DALL-E#Sports Illustrated#Wall Street Journal#Business Insider