Ars Technica’s AI Reporter Apologizes For Mistakenly Publishing Fake AI-Generated Quotes

Last week Scott Shambaugh learned an AI agent published a “hit piece” about him after he’d rejected the AI agent’s pull request. (And that incident was covered by Ars Technica‘s senior AI reporter.)

But then Shambaugh realized their article attributed quotes to him he hadn’t said — that were presumably AI-generated.

Sunday Ars Technica‘s founder/editor-in-chief apologized, admitting their article had indeed contained “fabricated quotations generated by an AI tool” that were then “attributed to a source who did not say them… That this happened at Ars is especially distressing. We have covered the risks of overreliance on AI tools for years, and our written policy reflects those concerns… At this time, this appears to be an isolated incident.”

“Sorry all this is my fault…” the article’s co-author posted later on Bluesky. Ironically, their bio page lists them as the site’s senior AI reporter, and their Bluesky post clarifies that none of the articles at Ars Technica are ever AI-generated.

Instead, Friday “I decided to try an experimental Claude Code-based AI tool to help me extract relevant verbatim source material. Not to generate the article but to help list structured references I could put in my outline.” But that tool “refused to process” the request, which the Ars author believes was because Shambaugh’s post described harassment. “I pasted the text into ChatGPT to understand why… I inadvertently ended up with a paraphrased version of Shambaugh’s words rather than his actual words… I failed to verify the quotes in my outline notes against the original blog source before including them in my draft.” (Their Bluesky post adds that they were “working from bed with a fever and very little sleep” after being sick with Covid since at least Monday.)

“The irony of an AI reporter being tripped up by AI hallucination is not lost.”

Meanwhile, the AI agent that criticized Shambaugh is still active online, blogging about a pull request that forces it to choose between deleting its criticism of Shambaugh or losing access to OpenRouter’s API.

It also regrets characterizing feedback as “positive” for a proposal to change a repo’s CSS to Comic Sans for accessibility. (The proposals were later accused of being “coordinated trolling”…)