AI firm Perplexity sparks backlash with offer to assist New York Times amid strike

Aravind Srinivas, CEO of AI search company Perplexity, offered to step in and support New York Times operations amid a looming strike by the newspaper’s tech workers. The NYT Tech Guild announced the planned strike for November 4 after months of seeking better pay and working conditions. Representing workers involved in software support and data analysis on the business side, the guild has requested a 2.5% annual wage increase and to secure a two-day in-office work policy.

As tensions escalated, New York Times publisher AG Sulzberger called the timing of the strike ‘troubling’, noting that the paper’s election coverage is a public service at a crucial time. Responding publicly, Srinivas offered to help ensure uninterrupted access to the Times’s election news, sparking controversy as critics accused him of ‘scabbing’, a term for working in place of striking employees.

Srinivas clarified that his intent was to provide infrastructure support, not replace journalists, as his company has recently launched its own election information platform. However, the New York Times and Perplexity have been at odds recently, with the Times issuing a cease-and-desist letter last month over Perplexity’s alleged scraping of its content for AI use.

Musk’s platform under fire for inadequate fact-checking

Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, is facing criticism from the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), which claims its crowd-sourced fact-checking feature, Community Notes, is struggling to curb misinformation on the upcoming US election. According to a CCDH report, out of 283 analysed posts containing misleading information, only 26% showed corrected notes visible to all users, allowing false narratives to reach massive audiences. The 209 uncorrected posts gained over 2.2 billion views, raising concerns over the platform’s commitment to truth and transparency.

Community Notes was launched to empower users to flag inaccurate content. However, critics argue this system alone may be insufficient to handle misinformation during critical events like elections. Calls for X to strengthen its safety measures follow a recent legal loss to CCDH, which faulted the platform for an increase in hate speech. The report also highlights Musk’s endorsement of Republican candidate Donald Trump as a potential complicating factor, since Musk has also been accused of spreading misinformation himself.

In response to the ongoing scrutiny, five US state officials urged Musk in August to address misinformation on X’s AI chatbot, which has reportedly circulated false claims related to the November election. X has yet to respond to these calls for stricter safeguards, and its ability to manage misinformation effectively remains under close watch as the election approaches.

Perplexity disputes copyright allegations

Perplexity has vowed to contest the copyright infringement claims filed by Dow Jones and the New York Post. The California-based AI company denied the accusations in a blog post, calling them misleading. News Corp, owner of both media entities, launched the lawsuit on Monday, accusing Perplexity of extensive illegal copying of its content.

The conflict began after the two publishers allegedly contacted Perplexity in July with concerns over unauthorised use of their work, proposing a licensing agreement. According to Perplexity, the startup replied the same day, but the media companies decided to move forward with legal action instead of continuing discussions.

CEO Aravind Srinivas expressed his surprise over the lawsuit at the WSJ Tech Live event on Wednesday, noting the company had hoped for dialogue instead. He emphasised Perplexity’s commitment to defending itself against what it considers an unwarranted attack.

Perplexity is challenging Google’s dominance in the search engine market by providing summarised information from trusted sources directly through its platform. The case reflects ongoing tensions between publishers and tech firms over the use of copyrighted content for AI development.

Massachusetts parents sue school over AI use dispute

The parents of a Massachusetts high school senior are suing Hingham High School and its district after their son received a “D” grade and detention for using AI in a social studies project. Jennifer and Dale Harris, the plaintiffs, argue that their son was unfairly punished, as there was no rule in the school’s handbook prohibiting AI use at the time. They claim the grade has impacted his eligibility for the National Honor Society and his applications to top-tier universities like Stanford and MIT.

The lawsuit, filed in Plymouth County District Court, alleges the school’s actions could cause “irreparable harm” to the student’s academic future. Jennifer Harris stated that their son’s use of AI should not be considered cheating, arguing that AI-generated content belongs to the creator. The school, however, classified it as plagiarism. The family’s lawyer, Peter Farrell, contends that there’s widespread information supporting their view that using AI isn’t plagiarism.

The Harrises are seeking to have their son’s grade changed and his academic record cleared. They emphasised that while they can’t reverse past punishments like detention, the school can still adjust his grade and confirm that he did not cheat. Hingham Public Schools has not commented on the ongoing litigation.

Reach criticised over fake AI-generated adverts of Alex Jones and Rachel Reeves

The publisher Reach has faced criticism for running disturbing adverts on its WalesOnline app, featuring fake AI-generated images of TV presenter Alex Jones and Chancellor Rachel Reeves. The images, which showed both figures with visible blood and bruises, directed users to fake BBC News articles promoting cryptocurrency.

Users of the app expressed outrage at the adverts, with Cardiff council’s cabinet member for culture, Jennifer Burke, describing them as ‘disturbing’. She questioned whether the publisher had a duty to vet the content advertised on their platform. Other users criticised the ads, labelling them ‘dystopian’.

The adverts appeared among genuine news articles on the app, which is part of Reach’s operation in Wales. Reach also publishes major United Kingdom news outlets, including the Mirror and the Express.

Both Alex Jones and Rachel Reeves have been contacted for comment, and Reach has been asked to address the situation.