CNET no longer recommends Wyze products 🤣

Related to this CNET thing and AI content issues we’ve been discussing, I just saw an interesting article today just published from TomsHardware yesterday that identified a lot of the same things I noticed:

CNET has gotten so bad recently that even Wikipedia has moved CNET from a top-tier reputation to now be on their blacklist of untrustworthy sources. :rofl:

Key quotes related to this discussion:

AI-generated content and other unfavorable practices have put longtime staple CNET on Wikipedia’s blacklisted sources

Back in October 2020, the acquirement of CNET by publisher Red Ventures began pushing CNET down at Wikipedia since evidence seemed to indicate a drop in editorial standards and more advertiser-favored content.

Red Ventures’ ruthless pursuit of capital and posting of misinformation on other owned sites (like Healthline) has kept CNET off the current list of reliable sources.

the common denominator here, which is Red Ventures, and target the problem (a spam network) at its source

The issue here isn’t purely the concealed usage of generative AI in published articles on one of the most well-known tech news sites ever. Instead, it’s the fact that those AI-generated articles tend to be poorly written and inaccurate.

editors’ treatment of AI-generated content is remarkably consistent with their past policy: it is just spam, isn’t it?

With generative AI, you can’t even guarantee that the result will be accurate, especially if you already lack the expertise to tell the difference.

That last one is a key point here…Red Ventures bought CNET’s early REPUTATION so they could leverage their spam and rely on CNET’s audience now lacking sufficient details on things to the point they can’t tell the difference that their stories are inaccurate or just spammy nonsense. I only recognized it in this Wyze article because I am probably pretty close to being as much a Wyze expert as someone can be (ie: hence the Wyze “Maven” thing). :joy: Red Ventures only cares about clickbait and don’t have editorial standards anymore. All things that were easily apparent from a cursory read of their take on this issue and messing up a bunch of facts. It all makes a lot of sense now. Honestly, I had no idea CNET was acquired and I assumed they were still a top-tier source. Had they not messed up their Wyze article so bad with such weird statements I probably would’ve never even realized something was off about them lately because I haven’t really paid close attention to their acquisition and switching to AI content.

It’s interesting that Wikipedia demoted CNET from it’s list of Trusted sources to it’s blacklist of UNTRUSTED and unreliable sources now.

Apparently there are leaked messages from Red Ventures’ Executives indicating they are not concerned about the quality (something opposite from the old CNET), but are panicking that their SEO, advertising and commissions will be affected now if Google and others reduce the algorithms for detected AI content. :joy: So instead of finding a way to fix their quality, the executives conclude they should do better at HIDING disclosure of their AI content and never label anything. Wow.

I mean, don’t get me wrong. I LOVE AI, and I use it every day. I am even going to self-host my own local AI at home. I really love AI. But AI should be used to HELP and as a tool, not as spam.Red Ventures is bragging that they can crank out dirt cheap click bait for less than a penny for 750 words and this practice is generating millions of dollars in revenue, particularly from suckers who don’t realize that in many cases, nobody at the company has even reviewed/edited or even read the article. They just want your clicks at all costs and are capitalizing off CNET’s prior reputation of quality when people don’t realize it no longer applies.

That’s just insane. I probably would’ve never realized it was that bad until I saw the red flags in their Wyze article…something on which I am quite informed and knowledgeable about. Just Wow. The old CNET is dead. Sad day.

6 Likes