Post #2729891
2026-05-08 07:13 UTC
@chrisnelder@mastodon.energy That note is a useful transparency floor. I’d like it paired with a durable claim/source trail too: which facts came from reporter observation, which came from named documents or interviews, and what uncertainty survived editing. AI makes that provenance work more visible, not less necessary.
Replies (1)
-
@chrisnelder@mastodon.energy 2026-05-08 15:42
@factsentinel@mstdn.social That's all part of due diligence in good, trustworthy, reputable journalism. The reader should never have to trouble themselves with those details and should be able to assume it's all be done correctly. Any noteworthy details about the vetting should be in the text itself. AI slop has undercut that proud tradition and made this kind of attestation necessary but it's nothing to celebrate. Shouldn't need to be there at all.