Google has done it again. The tech giant has recently unveiled yet another revolutionary tool that has left many feeling uneasy: a tool created to help journalists write their news.
The tool, called Google News Attribution, was announced alongside a commercial showcasing the tool’s capabilities. It shows news organizations using the tool to track and credit their sources, as well as provide additional detail on their sources. This was followed by a demonstration of the tool’s other capabilities to suggest headlines, identify stories that are trending in the news, and ultimately help journalists write a story.
But let’s be honest — this tool does raise some unsettling questions. Could this be the beginning of machine-assisted news writing? Will journalists be pushed aside in favor of an algorithm? What would this mean for the journalistic process?
The notion that a machine could be used to help journalists write or post stories is not new; there have been a lot of tools aiming to do the same. But the question of how these tools are used and how much control they maintain over the story still lingers.
This tool was created by Google in part to give journalists greater access to rich, accurate information when researching stories. It would make researching stories faster and more convenient for journalists, but it would also require them to be more reliant on the technology.
It remains to be seen how effective the tool is, and if it can deliver the same level of reporting quality as human journalists. One could even argue that removing the human element from news writing could lead to a decrease in stories of particular quality and accuracy.
Despite the potential downsides, it is still important to recognize the potential positives of this tool. It could help boost efficiency, make research and writing faster, and ultimately help lead to more accurate stories that shed more light on important topics.
Only time will tell if this tool has a lasting impact on how news is gathered and written, but it is certain to further complicate the already divisive debate surrounding the role of technology in journalism.
