[am1m]

A perspective from the content creation side of things:

The sad fact is a lot of human writers/photographers have been generating mediocre content long before AI. And a large section of the target audience have gotten used to thinking that is good content. So,

Originally Posted by Samurai

Why should anyone read AI generated content? It is just word salad.

Lots of popular content aggregating websites (esp lifestyle and sports content websites) are precisely that. They've been using low-paid content creators and junior freelance writers to generate their product. Now they'll use AI.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Sites using AI generated content will lose viewers in a hurry. Those who write genuine content will continue to thrive.

Agreed that those who know their subject and can write well will thrive, always will. But the demand for a constant flow of content/stock photos will ensure that the content-aggregating sites that just depend on volume will continue to go on as well.

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

AI will never be able to explain why a 60-odd BHP Figo was more fun around the twisties than cars making twice the horses and costing thrice as much.

And how many human writers can convey that emotion really well either? Each auto magazine might have a couple. Those journos will continue to do well. But for the rest of the magazine content, I'm sure AI will do fine. (Probably better than most 'news' articles I read in newspapers like the Times of India!)

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

Best it can do is aggregate and repeat what other human owners of said assets have to say.

And there are several content websites that work on precisely that model. Add clickbait headlines, some basic SEO/keyword work, some stock images, but essentially regurgitate stuff from other original sources.

The fact is the original content business was doing badly much before AI got anywhere near this competent at generating content. Nat Geo is now going to depend on freelancers and will only have digital editions. I remember what a good paper ToI was and what it has become today. Most of the blame is because independent magazines/websites never really got the content monetization model to work well/seamlessly. Subscriptions were messy, writing quality gave way to advertising demands. Part of the issue is content consumption habits have changed.

There will always be examples of great human generated content, always. And that will be the good/great writing. But overall, I certainly see a lot of AI generated content doing just well enough to work out. That's pretty much all most content aggregators need.

Guys, just look around you at the way people 'read' on their phones these days. Watch the average time spent on each piece. Notice the constant scrolling. That's the new target audience for most journalism/content creators. (Not to say there aren't people who will want to read in-depth, well-crafted pieces anymore, there will always be, across generations.)

[dileepcm]

I think we are for sure going to see a ton of AI generated audio/video/text content in coming months and years. For example, Its not that complex anymore to create a well designed YouTube video on on a new car model based on the spec sheet or based on the content from the car company's website. Such machine learning capabilities will generate a ton of content.

This auto generation of content is probably going be a creating a new space for revenue generation.

Having said, the real reviews will still have to be done by humans for years to come.

[Samarth 619]

I see AI reducing the workload of auto journos, most of the time their life is super busy, I can see a part of that being taken up by AI.

The roles that require a human to be useful/ work correctly:-
1. Reviewing actual bikes, cars and auto gears and accessories.
2. Improving content created by AI in terms of creative writing.
3. Finalising stuff.
4. Maintaining industrial relations with automobile companies and their managers, often ignored but super important.
5. Creating new ideas and implementing them.
6. Interacting with viewers, I don't think anyone wants AI to talk to them, even though it happens on websites, etc.
7. Revewing suggestions for improvement

The roles that may benefit from AI's role:-

1. Creating articles on the basis of keywords/ information provided by human being.
2. Creating auto updating spec sheets and information charts, etc.
3. Editing a magazine and auto arranging content, including ads,

I think AI can suggest and human can finalise, this would be the best approach.
Overall, no use being negative about AI, it will takeover because we humans are profit minded and short term thiking. I still think its better if its restricted to a level where it doesn't take over humans doing a job.

[vamsi.kona]

My opinion here is from a complete non-techie perspective as I know nothing about the workings of AI at a technical level apart from a broad sketch from a laymans perspective.

In my area of work, financial markets, over the last 2 decades the kind of the ease with which one could analyse the markets has grown exponentially. Earlier a few softwares could give one access to various financial metrics of different companies in a concise and easy to read manner. Now we are at a place where the system itself can compile, analyse, run simulations and then optimise the strategy and throw out an investment/trading idea. And I believe we are still at the beginning of this evolution. To do the same job earlier a Research house would have employed many juinior analysts then a few senior analysts and then a manager at the top who would ultimately take the call. With the current capabilities one can easily remove lot of the junior level employees.

Same is the case with customer care industry where many of us are already chatting with a bot. Even now these bots are pretty dumb and one can easily recognise if they are chatting with a bot or human. But with the pace at which the natural language models are evolving it may not be a stretch to say that many of those jobs will be gone. Of course jobs will probably shift to tech side, but just like automation in manufacturing sector, the number of new jobs created may not be equal to number of jobs made redundant. Also it is my opinion that while the new tech jobs create/bring in more value in ecomic terms, the number of jobs are normally very less compared to the jobs that were made redundant, especially in areas like manufacturing.

Now obviously all these examples are from non-creative aspects or applications. But I have read about few companies using just AI to create video content for their marmeting purposes. And not the animated version or such, a complete impersonation of a real human, which, even the said individual was very impressed with.
Guardian article of the same.

Many of us might have also seen AI generated images of real and imaginary people. As of now this is restricted to fun part, but when serious actors and big players move in it may change entirely. And as a few pointed out, majority of content in the creative sectors, especially the text part is very generic and just a rehash of some event with different words or style. AI can actually do a far better job than many with it's ability to be better and grammar(I myself suck at grammar).

Coming to the primary part, journalism in general and automotive journalism in particular, I can envision a hypothetical (I believe this is possible) scenario where an AI model can provide far better environment for a customer trying to read a review of a vehicle than majority, if not all, journalists. I am of the strong opinion that majority, including people like me, aren't the typical T-bhpian who is very adept at the technical aspects of a car. Also many a times the opinions can be vague or subjective which may not properly transmit the idea that the reviewer wants to convey.

Take the below hypothetical example/situation.
Modern cars come in with lots of tech with many features requiring some sort of connectivity. In near future a car connected to internet or a server of the manufacturer may be default. I magine the amount of performance data that can be gathered from every single car anonymously and put that data to compare the performance of different models across n number of situations/conditions. Leave alone real world data, a portal can have a device plugged in and review all the various models and collect the data across a set of similar conditions on a track designed to reflect the various driving scenarios. One can probably completely automate the driving itself if the track is designed in such a way that just with a device plugged in one can automatically drive it with a software. With the amount of data collected they can now objectively tell which car performs how in which scenarios. The same can be put in simple sentences given the evolution of language models.

One can correctly say there is more to driving/review than just numbers and analysis. But reviews can be highly subjective. Two different people driving the same car can come out with opinions ranging from being same to diametrically opposite. Now imagine an interactive AI persona that can interact with every customer and give them the analysis in simple language based on their own requirements. Say, I want to know the performance of a car at speeds between 80 and 100 specifically. The AI model can analyse the data across the various car tests and put out the results and describe the performance in simple to understand language along with providig data to those who want to dig deep.

Does that mean automotive journalism will be dead. Not quite. Just like in an age of precision engineering a hand made watch still commands some premium and is a niche segment. Similarly there are companious in ultra luxury segment which market hand made vehicle as a niche. So would be an article written by a human.

[ValarMorghulis]

I think not just automotive journalism but the future of journalism itself is at crossroads.
With the advent of TikTok, InstaReels, YouTube Shorts and other byte sized video formats the appetite for long form and other reading materials is on a precipitous decline.
I remember telling my friends about an upcoming movie "Killers of the Flower Moon" starring Leonardo DiCaprio and the book it is based on. When I suggested that folks read the book (which is an absolute page turner) many commented instead on just watching the movie.

One of my nieces also hoodwinked me recently (kudos to her). I used to actively discuss different novels with her and their character arcs etc. I admired her voracious reading until was informed by my cousin that she doesn't read. Instead watches the summaries of the books on YouTube. I felt betrayed

Recently National Geographic Magazine also let go of its entire staff writers. The magazine will rely on freelancers, guest writers and assignments pieced together by editors.
Link

Long form articles are a dying breed now. Enjoy as much as you can and preserve the good articles.

[Raghu M]

A simple straight point. Even if AI gives a review, how on earth would anyone take it at face value? Will ChatGPT drive a car by itself? If people argue that it can, then God bless us. Yes, the quality of automotive journalism will dilute further as anyone with a YouTube channel can endorse a product or criticize it. AI has it's limitations and this is one field it won't give any sort of competition to anyone. Self driving cars are a distant dream in India, same with some AI taking over jobs in the sector.

[am1m]

Just tried a quick experiment.

Fed four fact prompts on the Chandrayaan 3 launch to Bard (considered inferior to GPT-4) and asked for an article. Compared that with an article already on the subject on a news website that I think is pretty good (The Print).

Even with the quick and rushed (under 5 minutes figuring the prompts) experiment, the result was:

1. Not as good as the original article.
2. But managed to retrieve an additional relevant quote that the original article missed.
3. As good as the articles on 'not as good' news websites (such as Rediff).
4. Better than articles on the numerous news-aggregating websites.
5. Will obviously be unacceptable at a really good news outfit.

Journalists/content creators at the kind of outfits mentioned in points 3 and 4 better watch out!

Journalists at outfits referenced in points 1 and 2 could use tools like this to polish articles, add stuff they missed.

Journalists at reputed news outfits (and there are fewer each decade) will continue the good work. But I see potential for agencies like Reuters to be mined for facts and prompts rather than whole news articles in the future. As it is several big news outfits are sourcing articles/base facts from there instead of investing in their own news desks and investigative journalism.

And of course a whole new set of jobs - good prompt writers.

[Rajiv0909]

I voted yes for a simple reason - the quality of content.


Youtube any major auto media house and check any damn review, there are 2-3 things in common:

1. Most read or recite the product spec sheet/ USPs
2. There's no point of view communicated by journos, half of them aren't even qualified to speak on the subject.
3. They try to create a visual impression, a dream of sorts that they want the audience to believe in. In other words, auto reviews have become 4-5 minute ads for automobile companies.

Generative AI can do all of this and more easily. Unless there is experience and expertise conveyed, reviews are unbiased, Generative AI will take over and soon.

[kika]

AI doesn't work for current news and also it produces incorrect information at times. So a human touch is always required now and in future.

[Livnletcarsliv]

I voted NO. For 1 simple reason that

At least with the current technologies (and technology roadmap in the distant future), there is nothing that can replace or imitate the human touch, empathy, sympathy, 6 senses, emotion, etc. which is the ultimate factor for any automotive enthusiast.

[5252rpm]

As long as they plan to be the extended marketing arm of OEM, yes! With everyone having equal easy access to technology, it will be a cake walk for every tom,dick, and harry to claim themselves as an auto journalist. Content strategy will be something that decides the way forward. Everyone will have to find their niche.

[ampere]

The first drive review and feature analysis is what an AI can probably conquer. What about a long term ownership reviews like what our members contribute over time? That is a much bigger quotient of information which many look forward to before making a decision.

So definitely some sections may get annexed by AI, but the human element remains. And as AI grows, am sure even the human brains grows as well to stand at a higher pedestal.

[AnAntinspired]

Ai answers itself - ARTIFICIAL...hello geeks. From food to intelligence - Since when did artifical become better than real? Intelligence is secondary, artificial dumbness itself is not as enjoyable as the real one for mirth!

[Takumi Fujiwara]

Originally Posted by CentreOfGravity

Artificial Intelligence. A topic that has garnered quite a lot of interest in the past few years. All this while, we were talking of a future where AI would take over many jobs. That 'future' isn't too far away now...

A few days back, I was discussing with my parents about my dream job, automobile journalism. We were talking about its pros and cons, when they raised an important point - the relevance of automobile journalism with the onset of AI. That was when it struck me; will the current crop of media houses fall prey to AI? Will we have AI generated reviews instead of Team-BHP reviews? If it does indeed take over, how will the system function? Though I feel that AI cannot replace human opinions and feelings about a car, I know that my defense may not be good enough. So, my question to the esteemed members of this forum - Do you think AI will take over automobile journalism along with other jobs? If so, how?

I really hope and pray that automotive journalism is here to stay. We already have platforms like ChatGPT which provide reviews sourced from the internet, will it be long before they are the source? Looking forward to your views and opinions.

Hey CentreOfGravity! Keeping in mind I work at CarandBike.com, I too was fairly worried about this when GPT was initially launched. "Am I redundant within the workplace now?" I asked myself. However, I soon realized that like you said, "AI cannot replace human opinions and feelings about a car" and you are absolutely right about that. Being in the auto journalism sector, I truly believe that in the coming months, AI must not be looked at as the competition for Auto Journalists, but instead a means to better refine their literary work. End of the day, it is us who will be driving the cars and sharing valuable feedback. Who knows, maybe in the years to come, AI will be on a level where one could just insert a chip into a car to determine various things such as ride quality, and refinement. But, what about things such as build quality? Keeping in mind that we are reviewing a 'machine', I think its imperative to have that human touch to these reviews in order to really connect with the audience. Hope this answer helps!

[am1m]

Case in point, head over to the thread about the Bajaj-Triumph Speed 400. The recent posts include 2 separate comparo-reviews from 2 different auto portals. The one from the better known auto journalism brand has almost nothing that is outside the spec sheet of the 2 bikes being compared (the 400 and the Duke 390). While watching that, I was thinking that this sort of review is a good use case for AI (video/audio/content) generation. All the reviewer did was quote things from the spec and say "bike a has the edge here, bike b because of this slightly higher figure", interspersed with some random shots of the bikes being ridden.

The other review (comparing the 400 with the Dominar) had more of a quirky, human touch, with an intro that showed a clip from an old Spiderman cartoon. That sort of creative touch will probably be safe from AI...for some time.