A.I vs. Football Journalism: Can Chat GPT help or hinder this saturated industry

As the end of the year looms nearer and nearer, I can’t help but get a tad wistful and nostalgic. I think of the year that has concluded, and I think of Christmases past. There’s a bit of a running joke in my family that I don’t like change, which is fair. When my brother announced earlier this year that his fiancé was pregnant, one of my first reactions was “where will everyone sit at Christmas?” (don’t fret, the baby is happy and healthy, and we have ample seating). Change can be good, however. Change is progress. Change is improving and adapting. Change is controversial.

One of the most controversial notions of change in the modern world is artificial intelligence, or AI. Chat GPT is at the forefront of AI, and the impact that this technology has on creativity is remarkable. On one hand, it can be an incredible tool that can be a creative sparring partner. On the other hand, it can, and will make real people redundant. There are pros and there are cons. I am excited at the possibilities of this tool in the industry, while others at Heart of Football are fervently against it.

The point? Is there a point? It wouldn’t be me without some rambles and long-winded tangents. The point, I think, is this: I believe that AI can be a help to football writers, however if any agency believes that it can replace humans then they are likely kidding themselves. I’ve decided to write a short article using Chat GPT 3.5. This is the free version, therefore I am not expecting it to be perfect. I more want to show what is and isn’t feasible using this technology.

First and foremost, a title is needed. But what title? For AI’s help, I’ve had to work back to front ever so slightly. I’ve already asked it if it can write an article about whether AI can write an article on football. I’ve then asked it to propose an outline. From this information I have then asked Chat GPT the following:

For this proposed article, can you suggest ten possible titles?

The programme spat out the following suggestions:

1. “The Algorithmic Match: AI vs. Football Journalism”
2. “Kicking Bytes: Exploring AI’s Role in Football Narratives”
3. “Artificial Intelligence on the Pitch: Can Algorithms Score in Football Writing?”
4. “Beyond Binary: Unraveling the AI Game of Football Journalism”
5. “From Code to Corner Kicks: Assessing AI’s Football Storytelling”
6. “Goal or Glitch? Navigating the AI Field of Football Journalism”
7. “AI’s Extra Time: Prospecting the Future of Football Content”
8. “Soccer by the Silicon: Decoding AI’s Playbook in Football Writing”
9. “Bytes and Balls: The Algorithmic Dance of Football Narratives”
10. “Back of the Net or Buffering? The AI Experiment in Football Journalism”

Some of these aren’t bad, some are just pitiful. As you’ll note with the title of this article, I’ve used the first one as a base and adapted.

The next thing I asked it was:

Using the structure, you have suggested, write an introduction. Make it one paragraph. Use dry humour as the tone. Tone is very important to ensure that it fits the writer. I went for a general dry humour tone.

In a world where algorithms decide what pizza toppings we should love and which cat videos will go viral, the notion of artificial intelligence crafting heartfelt narratives about football might sound like a futuristic sitcom plot. Yet, here we are, peeling back the digital curtain to ponder the question: Can AI kick it with the best of them in the realm of football journalism? This journey into the virtual locker rooms and algorithmic playing fields explores whether the binary brains of AI can grasp the intricacies of the beautiful game or if we’re just setting ourselves up for a series of unintentional football-related puns. So, lace up your virtual boots, because we’re about to kick off this investigation into the goals, fouls, and occasional technical glitches of AI-generated football articles.

The overarching points made here are fine, but my goodness the tone is cheesier than a festive cheese board. I decided to shake things up by asking the programme the same question, but basing it on the style of an actual football writer. I asked…

Using the structure you have suggested, write an introduction. Make it one paragraph. Write in the style of Henry Winter.

In the ever-evolving tapestry of football’s narrative, an intriguing subplot unfolds, casting a spotlight on the unlikeliest of storytellers — artificial intelligence. As we navigate the intersection of algorithms and the beautiful game, a question lingers in the air: can the cold precision of AI capture the warmth, passion, and unpredictable cadence of football journalism? In this exploration, we venture into the realm where the binary meets the beautiful, delving into the nuances of AI-generated football content with a discerning eye. The pitch, both metaphorical and literal, becomes our arena as we seek to discern whether algorithms can truly master the art of football storytelling or if the human touch remains irreplaceable in this arena of sport and sentiment.

And another take, using HoF head-honcho Andrew Flint as inspiration (sorry Andrew…)

Using the structure you have suggested, write an introduction. Make it one paragraph. Write in the style of Andrew Flint.

In the ever-shifting landscape of football discourse, a novel subplot emerges, beckoning us to scrutinize the marriage of artificial intelligence and the beautiful game. As we embark on this odyssey, the burning inquiry arises: Can the digital synapses of AI algorithms grasp the visceral essence, the cultural tapestry, and the sheer poetic chaos that define football journalism? This exploration unfolds against the backdrop of data-driven dreams and the rhythmic pulse of the terraces, where we endeavor to discern whether the sterile precision of artificial intelligence can navigate the labyrinth of football narratives or if it merely stumbles in the labyrinthine dance of the world’s most captivating sport.

Is this accurate? I don’t know? Maybe? It doesn’t feel overly Andrew, but also it doesn’t feel overtly un-Andrew. Here is a link to some of his work, let us know what you think.

Is it ethical to have AI write in the style of an established author? My personal opinion is yes. If I was a professional writer/author and someone thought my work was good enough to be used as a template then I would be flattered, provided due credit was given. I gave AI an ask to see their take on it and was given this back:

The ethical considerations of asking ChatGPT to mimic the style of a specific author depend on the context and intent behind the request. Here are some points to consider

1. Educational or Creative Purposes: If the request is made for educational or creative purposes, such as exploring different writing styles or learning from a particular author’s approach, it may be considered ethical. This can be a valuable tool for understanding and practicing diverse writing styles.
2. Respectful Imitation: If the intent is to respectfully imitate an author’s style without claiming the work as one’s own or misleading others about its origin, it can be ethically acceptable. This is often done in homage or as an exercise in writing emulation.
3. Misrepresentation: If there is a risk of misrepresentation, such as passing off AI-generated content as the work of a specific author, it raises ethical concerns. Misleading readers about the origin of content can erode trust and authenticity.
4. Consent: Authors have a unique voice and style, and some may feel uncomfortable with their style being replicated, even for non-commercial or educational purposes. If possible, it’s ethical to respect an author’s preferences and seek permission if necessary.
5. Avoiding Plagiarism: It’s crucial to ensure that AI-generated content inspired by a specific author’s style does not lead to plagiarism. Plagiarism involves presenting someone else’s work as your own, and it is considered unethical in academic and creative writing.

In summary, the ethicality of asking ChatGPT to write in the style of an author depends on the purpose, transparency, and respect for the original author’s work. As with any tool, it’s important to use AI in a responsible and ethical manner.

Another issue with Chat GPT is the data. It is enormous and can essentially scan everything online and give you an answer in seconds. This is super handy, however there are pitfalls. For example, I could write an article about how Bobo Balde won the Ballon d’Or, or that Sweden won the African Cup of Nations in 2011, and those ludicrous stats may find themselves being used as an example. This is called hallucination. Those savvy at Chat GPT have the knowhow to put “don’t hallucinate” or “don’t guess” if there isn’t a binary yes/no type answer, but things can fall through the cracks; another reason why this technology should be used as a crutch and not a replacement for human input.

Another fault of Chat GPT is the up-to-datedness of the information. I am one of life’s cheapskates, so I’m not receptive to paying $20 a month for the paid site. As such, my info is capped. I can get very detailed stats from seasons gone by, but if I ask it who won the 2022 World Cup it is clueless.

I’m sorry, but as of my last knowledge update in January 2022, the FIFA World Cup in 2022 has not taken place yet, so I don’t have information on the winner. For the most recent and accurate information, I recommend checking the latest news, sports websites, or the official FIFA website.

I’ve prattled on for over 1500 words, well, me and Chat GPT. I’ve probably contributed about a third of it organically. Still, the jury is out. As in insight to how I work, I rarely make a plan, I just vibe it out, and I realised that I could either write the article with AI, or do just the paragraph as an example. I wanted to give some ideas of what is and isn’t feasible, ethical, and enjoyable.

Long story short, I think it is a handy tool. I think it can streamline research and it can help get the creative juices flowing. I would also strongly urge people to be careful with this technology. Treat it like Google on steroids. Fact check your info. Fact check your spelling for goodness sake, it’s an American system which means every sentence is plagued with Z’s and missing U’s. Infuriating.

I think the biggest thing that Chat GPT struggles at is replicating the style. I used Andrew Flint and Henry Winter as examples and it was serviceable, but it lacks heart. I used Chat to write this article a while ago. I tweaked parts but the article does not feel like me at all. With paid plans and a lot of knowledge on the subject, you can harness it to write more like you, but to the novice it has some work to do. But that, in my opinion, is a good thing. Don’t let AI replace you, let it help you. Let it be the Robin to your Batman.

*Ad* Interested in finding out more about AI? Check out Artificial Intelligence & Generative AI for Beginners: The Complete Guide (Generative AI & Chat GPT Mastery Series)