{"id":608962,"date":"2023-02-17T07:49:23","date_gmt":"2023-02-17T13:49:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/news.sellorbuyhomefast.com\/index.php\/2023\/02\/17\/how-will-chatgpt-change-freelancing-5-publishers-weigh-in\/"},"modified":"2023-02-17T07:49:23","modified_gmt":"2023-02-17T13:49:23","slug":"how-will-chatgpt-change-freelancing-5-publishers-weigh-in","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/2023\/02\/17\/how-will-chatgpt-change-freelancing-5-publishers-weigh-in\/","title":{"rendered":"How will ChatGPT change freelancing? 5 publishers weigh in"},"content":{"rendered":"

Given how easy it is to access and use ChatGPT, what\u2019s stopping a writer from putting an assignment brief into the chatbot, waiting for a story to generate and then submitting that to an editor?<\/p>\n

When that question was posed to heads of editorial teams at five different publishers, the simple answer was nothing. None of the editors or heads of content at Bustle Digital Group, Gizmodo, Forbes, Hunker or Trusted Media Brands had explicitly told contributors not to use ChatGPT to the degree of generating a story or had updated their freelance contracts since ChatGPT\u2019s launch.<\/p>\n

\n

At least, not yet.<\/p>\n

\u201cWell, you just gave me a great idea,\u201d said Beth Tomkiw, TMB\u2019s chief content officer. \u201cIt\u2019s so new \u2026 but we should be putting that in all of our [contracts]. We have steps in our process to check if anything\u2019s been plagiarized, and that\u2019s going to be an even murkier territory \u2014 unless we openly make a statement about that.\u201d<\/p>\n

Jill Schildhouse, a freelance writer and editor, said she had not received any communication regarding ChatGPT from the publications she\u2019s worked with. And that\u2019s left her in the dark as to those companies\u2019 policies regarding content generated by artificial intelligence (though, it should be noted, she hasn\u2019t been impressed in her recent experimentation with ChatGPT<\/a>).<\/p>\n

\u201cI don\u2019t know what any of my outlets\u2019 stance is on AI content. How do they know that their freelancers aren\u2019t submitting AI content? Are there plagiarism concerns? What other ethical concerns surround this? Outlets are going to have to come up with some type of guidelines around how it\u2019s used, both internally \u2026 [and] with their freelancers,\u201d Schildhouse said.<\/p>\n

Alesandra Dubin, another freelance writer and editor, said only one of the roughly 15 publications she\u2019s worked with had sent out a memo regarding ChatGPT. She declined to share which publisher, but Dubin said the company communicated an \u201cexplicit policy change, and there can be no usage of AI in contributed work.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThere are a lot of unanswered \u2014 or unknown to me \u2014 questions about plagiarism or what\u2019s expected of me under the contracts with the various outlets to which I contribute,\u201d Dubin said. \u201cOutlets really need to put some guidelines in place, and writers need to think long and hard before taking what appears to be the easy path. Because the second you introduce a major error into your content, you\u2019ve lost your readers and that publication is probably never going to work with you again.\u201d<\/p>\n

Is the tech even there yet?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

If freelancers are using ChatGPT to generate stories, they might actually be creating a path for their own demise.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf I found out a freelancer was using ChatGPT, why would I pay that freelancer? Because I could just use ChatGPT myself,\u201d said David Ewalt, editor-in-chief of G\/O Media\u2019s tech site Gizmodo. \u201cIf you were doing that, that\u2019s not what I\u2019m paying you for.\u201d<\/p>\n

Marc Lavallee, director of journalism at the Knight Foundation who deals with tech and product investment, agreed that AI technology shouldn\u2019t be doing most of the work when it comes to writing. The technology isn\u2019t that advanced yet, and it has the potential to make writers who use it seem obsolete.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf the machine did most of the work, you should probably disclose that. But also if the machine did most of the work and you\u2019re disclosing that, then what were you doing there?\u201d Lavallee said.<\/p>\n

But Forbes\u2019 chief content officer Randall Lane and Eve Epstein, svp and gm at Leaf Group\u2019s Hunker, both said they thought it was too early to have guidelines on the use of ChatGPT in place, especially since the technology isn\u2019t advanced enough to generate a story worthy of submitting to an editor.<\/p>\n

However, Epstein said heads of editorial teams do need to be thinking about how to communicate best practices with staff and freelancers alike. \u201cI think it would be irresponsible not to be thinking about this stuff,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

\u201cBest practices emerge out of a lot of practice,\u201d Lavallee added. \u201cRight now is the time to be doing the practice to understand what those best practices are for organizations.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2018The ethics of AI in the newsroom\u2019<\/h2>\n

At the end of the day, transparency between a contributor and editor is key \u2014 and the arrival of ChatGPT doesn\u2019t change that.<\/p>\n

\u201cI would think that the expectations should be clear with a freelancer \u2014 any work they submit would have to be their own original work, which I don\u2019t think is too dissimilar from what the existing expectations are,\u201d Joseph Lichterman, head of editorial and communications at The Lenfest Institute for Journalism, said in an email.<\/p>\n

But there\u2019s also a spectrum when it comes to ChatGPT use, Lavallee said. For example, using it to generate a headline is different from using it to generate the bones of a story. So the question becomes, to what degree is a freelancer\u2019s use of ChatGPT acceptable, and at what point have they gone too far?<\/p>\n

\u201cOne of the things that is tricky now and is going to continue to get trickier is trying to establish thresholds,\u201d Lavallee said.<\/p>\n

Alex Mahadevan, director of MediaWise at The Poynter Institute, said this \u201cgray area\u201d that comes with new technology is something to be concerned about.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cIn the world of journalism and transparency for readers, there really should be no gray areas. It should be very, very clear how the news gathering process works,\u201d he said. \u201cLet\u2019s get a handle on the ethics of AI in the newsroom before we go wild with it.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n