Translation. Region: Russian Federation –
Source: People's Republic of China in Russian – People's Republic of China in Russian –
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
Source: People's Republic of China – State Council News
LONDON, Feb. 2 (Xinhua) — A British think tank has expressed concern about the state of the news environment in the age of artificial intelligence (AI) and called on the government to be more involved in shaping rules, including fair pay and transparent disclosure of sources of AI-generated news.
In a report published this week, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) noted that AI tools are rapidly becoming the primary channel through which the public accesses news, fundamentally changing the news ecosystem.
However, as the largest AI companies emerge as the internet's new "gatekeepers," controlling how citizens access information and shaping public thinking, some established news outlets, such as BBC News, are under-cited by leading AI tools, including ChatGPT and Google Gemini, the report says.
The think tank warned that "disproportionate reliance on some sources over others risks narrowing the range of viewpoints users are exposed to and may lead to the amplification of particular views or agendas without the audience's knowledge." In this regard, the IPPR formulated three key policy recommendations for creating a healthy AI news environment.
First, governments should require AI companies to pay for the news content they use, ensuring fair payment and collective licensing agreements across a wide range of publishers.
Second, it is recommended to introduce clear and standardized “information labels” for AI news so that the public can see the sources of AI responses and understand how they are formed.
Third, governments need to use public funding to protect independent media in the AI era.
The report emphasizes that prompt action by governments is crucial to fostering a healthy AI news environment before the momentum to prevent further damage to the news ecosystem is lost. –0–
Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source. It represents an accurate account of the source's assertions and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.