points
1 month ago
| 1 comment
| HN
Thank you! After Benj Edwards and Kyle Orland's Ars Technica article they published using AI (while saying they didn't), and all the while their article was about an AI agent publishing a hit piece on Scott Shambaugh (matplotlib maintainer), I feel like I now assume journalists are using AI and things need to be fact-checked just as we do for our AI interactions.

I appreciate hearing about details like this and getting the source directly. I hope Kristina Armitage and Michael Kanyongolo from Quanta Magazine respond and you can update us!

Scott's Blog on Hit Piece: https://theshamblog.com/an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-piece-on... Ars Editor Note: https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retractio... Ars Retraction: https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/02/after-a-routine-code-reje...

▲
zeroonetwothree
1 month ago
[-]
It’s not like journalists were very accurate before AI. Classic Gell-Mann amnesia
reply
▲
moefh
1 month ago
[-]
Being "not very inaccurate" is very different from publishing outright fabricated quotes, which is what Ars Technica did and later admitted to: https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retractio...
reply
▲
monster_truck
1 month ago
[-]
Had no idea they even did anything. Was waiting for this. Nice to see some consequences and something resembling an attempt at integrity.

Now they just need to do something about all of the other writers! With the exception of the science lady, the security guy, and the british car guy, it's indistinguishable from the kind of PR-copy-paste blogspam 'coverage' you'd see from a place that will never have the reputation Ars used to.

reply
▲
shermantanktop
1 month ago
[-]
I see what you did there. Turning the page of time, I guess.
reply