Happy new year. This post is by Lizzie.
I always get the impression that many journalists are also on vacation during the New Year holidays. This was made even more acute when I returned after a few days away and found an „urgent“ media request in my inbox. Someone from a major, reputable news organization wrote:
We’re working on a short story about how the climate crisis is putting certain grapes used in almost all Champagne at risk of extinction. We wanted to do a quick interview with you on this topic… This article is scheduled to be published in the new year, so the deadline is fast approaching.
It was late on December 30th, so I couldn’t help them, but still, since „the climate crisis is putting certain grapes used in nearly all Champagne at risk of extinction“ I had to reply that I hope I can find better information.In my less-than-humble opinion while studying, it’s not very good information. this And we can think of zero zilchinada evidence to support this.
This sounded like the kind of insane news you’d expect from a more insane media outlet.I followed what I thought were the clues they were following (see here), it turns out it seems to be related to some kind of AI startup. I don’t do any services to mention because I’m just looking for more coverage. They seem to be putting out fancy-sounding agricultural press releases all the time, so they must have also put out a press release just in time for the new year about Champagne grapes being on the brink of extinction.
I’m currently in a bad situation with AI, or more precisely, where human standards intersect with AI. There is no scientific evidence that the climate crisis is putting the specific grapes used in almost all Champagne at risk of extinction. This whole idea is disgusting to me when human actions are actually causing species to go extinct. And it ignores the vast science behind wine grapes and the reality that wine grapes are very easy to grow (great grapes are hard to grow). In other words, AI startups with zero science standards are in bad shape. However, the media that cannot see through this is even scarier. I think they are inundated with a lot of crazy bogus stories every day, but I thought their job was to report on the important stuff, and hopefully have some evidence that it’s true. .
What did they do instead? They gave the „adaptive marketing manager and content creator“ a platform to talk about fake „research“ and a few other things. sound bite To a colleague of mine who actually knows science (Ben Cook from NASA).