“I need a better lede for this story,” I thought last week while writing on deadline. Unfortunately I was thinking out loud.
“Ask ChatGPT,” Jim replied.
Of course I was offended. And when I refused to seek assistance from artificial intelligence, he asked ChatGPT to write an editorial for a community newspaper about the inauguration. And then read me the response.
To be honest, I wasn’t really listening.
“Mine is better!” I said anyway.
I really hope it was.
I want to hate ChatGPT, mainly because it automates a process — writing — that is so personal and so individualized. I don’t want to read sentences produced by statistical probability based on what millions of other people have written. I want to read what an individual person has written.
But then I hear a presentation on how AI can scan thousands of pages of information and summarize them in seconds, facilitating the jobs of countless people, including reporters. Or a hear a teacher friend talking about how easy it is to have AI write test questions that fit certain parameters so she can focus her energy on other aspects of teaching that are more creative and more focused on students.
So I decide to give ChatGPT a few test runs.
“What is it like to raise a teenage girl?” I ask, and almost immediately receive a 746-word response (that’s longer than this column) addressing 10 different points and offering the following summary.
“Raising a teenage girl is a blend of support, patience and guidance as she navigates her journey from childhood to adulthood. You may encounter periods of resistance, but the key is to remain consistent in your love, open in your communication, and flexible in your approach to the changing needs and challenges of adolescence. At the end of the day, the process of raising a teenage girl is one of growth for both you and her.”
Not bad.
I thought I’d try something a little harder, and asked ChatGPT to explain a tax increment financing district. This time I got 618 words on the key concepts, an example of how a TIF works, the purpose of a TIF and criticism of TIFs, followed by the summary for those whose attention span is too short to read the previous 17 paragraphs.
I can’t imagine ever using this wording in an article, but I guess it could be helpful in explaining the concept to a new reporter. Of course when I was a new reporter, the way you learned about things you didn’t understand was by asking real people to explain them.
I had started writing this column but had yet to finish it when I read Peter Celauro’s column on Monday (it’s on the facing page). His subject? ChatGPT. What are the odds?
So I opened ChatGPT again.
“Please explain a coincidence” I typed into the box.
“Essentially, it’s a surprising or unusual alignment of events that happens purely by chance,” the response read.
It went on to offer an example before reaching the following conclusion.
“Coincidences often make people wonder if there’s something more to it, like fate or destiny, but in most cases, they’re just random occurrences that feel significant due to the unexpected nature of their timing or similarity.”
Could be. But I can’t help but wonder if ChatGPT — like my other digital friend, whose name begins with an “A” — is spying on me.
— Pamela Lannom is editor
of The Hinsdalean.
Readers can email her at
