Very good vademecum on the discussion, but I think is quite incorrect to say "there is no demand for AI generated fake news". The demand for (dis)information that confirm anyone's beliefs is very hight since ever, and no one openly 'want' AI generated fake news. They want 'information', that's it, and we should, as the article says, focus on improving our capacity to recognise fake news, despite are AI generated or not.
Thank you for your comment. I think we should not read "demand" as people actively looking for *false news*, but as looking for content that is packed, distributed and sponsored in a way that makes it highly likely to being fake (i.e. dubiously named blogs, whatsapp-shared videos, etc.). In the last years, it seems that people have not looked for this type of "packages", relying instead on mainstream sources
Very good vademecum on the discussion, but I think is quite incorrect to say "there is no demand for AI generated fake news". The demand for (dis)information that confirm anyone's beliefs is very hight since ever, and no one openly 'want' AI generated fake news. They want 'information', that's it, and we should, as the article says, focus on improving our capacity to recognise fake news, despite are AI generated or not.
Thank you for your comment. I think we should not read "demand" as people actively looking for *false news*, but as looking for content that is packed, distributed and sponsored in a way that makes it highly likely to being fake (i.e. dubiously named blogs, whatsapp-shared videos, etc.). In the last years, it seems that people have not looked for this type of "packages", relying instead on mainstream sources