[bonsai_spool]

> most people don't yell about synthesizers not being real music any more.

I think a lot more effort is required to release (popular) music, and I'm only hearing 'independent' music at concert venues which also require a lot of effort.

It doesn't take a lot of effort to transform the raw materials of journalism, which you cite, into a finished product outside the process of writing and sitting with your thoughts. And there isn't a similar venue to the idea of concerts where I can personally see journalists' skill/creativity/mastery.

Thus, I can't tell if the work of an AI-assisted journalist is intentional or complete the way I can tell if an AI song is poorly done.

[embedding-shape]

If you cannot tell if the work is poorly done or not, why it matters if it's AI or not?

The reason many of us dislike AI slop is because it's very evidently AI slop, if you cannot tell, then I wouldn't even say it's AI slop, maybe AI assisted if anything, but matters less if the content itself actually doesn't suck.

[bonsai_spool]

I was unclear - I can tell that there was an AI involved in writing readily.

In music, it's hard to make a convincing AI product (at the moment) because editing sound is challenging.

In journalism, it's easy to make AI articles and relatively easy to edit them not to sound like AI. So if someone isn't doing that minimal work, I wonder what other things they're taking the easy route for.