Is Ireland's fake tan use problematic?

The long game....

My own completely baseless hunch is that it was a disgruntled insider that knew what kind of article, even if ridiculous, that could make it through the editorial process because it plays the correct tune and poor oversight.

While I don't think it is necessary that the editor agreed with the author, they must have considered their argument reasonable despite the fact that that it was clearly absurd. It is this that's most damning for the individuals at the IT - it is the editors job to apply the sniff test. This looks like a case where either the author played to the editors biases and/or worse it's a department where editors demand little checking is done.

It's quite damaging for the reputation of the paper and O'Connell has been completely shown up.

The funny thing is that it shows how easily and cheaply these opinionators could be replaced. The question now is about how much clickbait stuff is AI generated. Would anyone be able to tell the difference?

Regards...jmcc

The main lesson here is not to buy, subscribe or link to the Irish Times. It is no longer a reputable organisation.

It has never been more important to deny support to organisations that broadcast divisive bile.

(I didn't really look at this thread as I thought it was just a silly thread about some random poster asking if fake tan was racist. But today I only discovered that the Irish Times published an article on this!)

As "privileged" "white people", who are they to question the writer's "lived experience"? etc.

The AI angle is still a bit of distraction. You can use AI to generate an article on anything. The bigger question is still why IT editors thinks this is worth publishing.

They probably thought it was worth publishing because they are of the mindset that everything is about race and worse still they are of the mindset that other people are interested in talking about race.

There are plenty like that out there.

Back in 2015 Starbucks had to abandon a initiative (for the use of a better word) that encouraged baristas to start discussions about race with customers.

Why ? Because baristas found it uncomfortable and so did customers.

People are generally not hung up about race, or whether wealth from the slave trade build a building or street in some European or New World town.

But publications like the New York Times or The Boston Globe will continue to make everything about race.

And here in Ireland The Irish Times looks up to the NY Times and the Globe.

They are what they think they want to be, and they have a vision of what we should be.

Highly embarrassing for the IT to be duped like this, definitely seems like a right wing trolling effort and a highly successful one at that. The "author" is the perfect embodiment of what the online right represents the modern left to be; "blue haired, genderqueer, LatinX land whale forever crying about cultural appropriation", like they lifted her description directly from 4Chan 😅

Whether they published the article because they felt it brought up an important issue in Ireland, or because it is clickbait dynamite that would create an internet storm (IMO it's the latter), the IT are going to have to seriously review their editorial process

There must be a few nervous "journalists" in the IT offices right now - after this article, it's pretty obvious that the likes of Fintan O'Toole, Jennifer O'Connell, Louise O' Neill and several others could easily be replaced by an AI version, and nobody would notice. I mean Fintan has been effectively writing the same article every week for years.

Imagine the cost savings, with no drop in "quality".

That's a bit harsh, hope your fashion sense is better.

Do not judge by the look would be my advice.

“Fintan O’Toole: Do you allow your wife to peg you? No? You’re a racist - here’s why.”

Plot twist: they (or rather, their creator) absolutely tried. And gobshites all the way up to IT's opinion editor fell for it hook, line and sinker. 😂

Except for the fact that AI exists and is already here.....