The hot topic these days in the history, sports, and communications worlds pertains to integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in writing.
It’s something that speaks to my various “hats” as a professional historian, communications professional, writer, and educator (ahh, student uses of it in the classroom…). While I’m not yet expert on this tool, I found the recent roundtable on ChatGPT, AI & History hosted by the History Communication Institute (disclaimer: I’m a member) helpful. HCI Founder Jason Steinhauer wrote this helpful discussion review that includes some of ChatGPT’s opportunities and challenges. A vital point of his to highlight [emphasis is mine]:
“Can GPT distinguish between authoritative sources and non-authoritative sources? ChatGPT continually delivers wrong answers and false information, and seems to not be able to discern one source from another.”
Thus, a key consideration from my perspective is that communication centers around authenticity. That applies equally for executive, corporate, and investor communications, marketing and fan engagement, journalism, and academic scholarship just as it does for student coursework.
Authenticity and transparency are also vital for public affairs and public diplomacy work, when governments communicate to their various publics, foreign or domestic. That applies for government sports diplomacy initiatives and policies, too.
Given the issues of misinformation and disinformation that already populate the Internet, on top of ChatGPT’s known issues of source validity and credibility, what does the future of AI tools mean for communications stakeholders?
If communication is about authenticity, isn’t AI counter to that?
There are some huge selling points for AI. It can potentially allow us to better understand and communicate, as in this super interesting example from Le Monde on how they recreated Gen. Charles de Gaulle’s famous 1940 cri de resistance.
Yet, many questions remain about how the AI writing tools like ChaptGPT can be credibly integrated as part of a practitioner’s larger toolbox. I would emphasize that it could be a tool, not a method or integral process.
👉To my students reading this, understand that ChaptGPT does not think critically, so your papers will not hit the mark if you rely on it to produce your assignments. There is unfortunately no shortcut to learning how to think critically; we all must put in the hard work to develop this skill. But the ability to critically think, synthesize, and problem-solve reaps huge rewards throughout your career, regardless of industry.