As our CEO has written (disapprovingly), “The big money loves the idea that artificial intelligence will replace journalists.” This practice is increasingly widespread, and we don’t want it to happen here. We doubt our readers or donors do, either. npr.org/2024/05/16/125…

🔹Demand 2: CIR must work with, and get consent from, the Union before implementing AI tools.

Last year, President Biden declared that workers should “have a seat at the table in determining how these technologies are developed and used” bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/…

VP Vance agrees: “For all major AI policy decisions coming from the federal government, the Trump Administration will guarantee American workers a seat at the table.” CIR’s policies should be at least as democratic and worker-friendly as the Trump admin’s youtu.be/ocfcVuuuMpQ?si…

Why do workers need a seat at the AI table? The threat to our livelihoods and working conditions is obvious. It’s clear that reckless use of AI could have catastrophic consequences for the reputations of our publications and the journalists who work here.

A BBC study of AI tools found that “51% of all AI answers to questions about the news were judged to have significant issues of some form” and “13% of the quotes sourced from BBC articles were either altered or didn’t actually exist in that article” bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/do…

In January, Apple was forced to suspend its AI news summary notification feature, which had concocted false stories and wrongly attributed them to real news outlets bbc.com/news/articles/…

Our editor-in-chief has written about how AI “enshitification” and “AI slop” has “ruined” search engines. We’re asking management to work with us to ensure AI enshitification never ruins Mother Jones and Reveal

Years ago, FIRE Senior Fellow Jacob Mchangama moved to America to build a think tank to defend free expression, only to see the free speech culture many noncitizens cherish curtailed. This new McCarthyism is un-American — and Jacob intends to fight it, even if it puts him at risk.

If Trump is serious about tariffs on movies, it's a very dangerous escalation. Tariffs have not traditionally been applied to services, and the United States is a massive net exporter of services. We would be extremely vulnerable to any service-based retaliation.

Plaintiffs argue that the administrative offices of the federal judiciary constitutionally must be within the executive branch (and subject to FOIA), suggesting the president must be able to control them. I doubt Chief Justice Roberts would agree, but he's also a named defendant.

Trump admits he's iffy on the whole due process thing motherjones.com/politics/2025/…

Justin Wolfers Especially because the Berman Amendment in IEEPA specifically prohibits the president from using IEEPA on movies (and other informational materials), so as to protect the free exchange of ideas and information

The dangerous legal theory behind Trump’s power grabs motherjones.com/politics/2025/… via Mother Jones

Bill of Attainder!

Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to fly for free motherjones.com/politics/2025/…

Important thread on journalism, labor and AI

I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it without government retribution against your publicly subsidized exploding-space-ship company motherjones.com/politics/2025/…