Reminds me of a story about a copying machine that had a image compression algorithm for scans which changed some numbers on the scanned page to make the compressed image smaller. (Can't remember where I read about that, must have been a couple years ago on HN)
And yes, I think this is a relevant comparison. As the entropy model becomes more sophisticated, errors are more likely to be plausible texts with different meaning, and less likely to be degraded in ways that human processing can intuitively detect and compensate for.
My understanding of this fault was that it was a bug in their implementation of JBIG2, not the actual compression? Linked article seems to support this.
[1]: https://www.xerox.com/assets/pdf/ScanningQAincludingAppendix...
I did check some of the sources, but was not able to find the one I remember which had statistics on it.
The xerox FAQ to it does lead me to consider that I might be confusing this with some other incident though, as they claim that Scanning is the only thing that is affected.
I'd believe him more then any other source.
But the nature of the algorithm means that you have this danger by default. So it's fair to put some blame there.