What's your opinion?
Yes. In a few ways it’s considerably worse. Your website is referencing major world events, including war and freedom of press, by leveraging uninformed comments from the web (many of them themselves written by AI). That would be a problem even if your content weren’t auto-generated (random comments don’t make good or accurate journalism) but it’s worse when it’s churned at a high rate and introduces its own false interpretations.
Since this project just went live I'm still figuring out how to communicate that.
That’s good in theory, but people will use it like that anyway. We’re living in an era of rampant misinformation. Provable truths we’ve know for thousands of years are being called into question (the shape of the Earth). Even people who should know to do their own research (see recent case of lawyers using ChatGPT) are taking AI output as unquestionable truth. Your website won’t eliminate bias, it will only give people more sources to cherry pick.
> Hence, I try to highlight different view points along with contrasting opinions
Which exacerbates the issue. If we can prove the Earth is a sphere and 99% of people understand that, making it seem like the “contrasting opinion” is equally valid and deserves the same weighted consideration makes the problem worse, not better. John Oliver illustrated the problem in 2014, using climate change as the example.
There needs to be a dial between 100% stories about Prigozhin/wagner and 100% stories about Elon Musk's narcissistic press headline grab of the week.