--- title: "Washington Post Says It Will Continue AI-Generating Error Filled Podcasts as Its Own Editors Groan in Embarrassment" description: "The Washington Post said it will continue deploying its error riddled, AI-generated podcasts, because \"this is how products get built.\"" date: "2025-12-16" modified: "2025-12-16" authors: - name: "Frank Landymore" job_title: "Contributing Writer" link: "https://futurism.com/authors/flandymore" url: "https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/washington-post-continue-ai-podcasts" categories: - "Artificial Intelligence" - "Ethics" --- # Washington Post Says It Will Continue AI-Generating Error Filled Podcasts as Its Own Editors Groan in Embarrassment ![The Washington Post said it will continue deploying its error riddled, AI-generated podcasts, because "this is how products get built."]() *Getty / Futurism* The outcry sparked by the *Washington Post's* launch of AI-generated podcasts has gone in one ear of the newspaper's leadership and out the other, which isn't too dissimilar to what might happen to anyone listening to the slop it's trying to peddle. On Monday, the Jeff Bezos-owned publication doubled down on its personalized podcasts push, brushing aside the criticism from readers and its own reporters alike. "This is how products get built and developed in the digital age: ideation, research, design and prototyping, development, and then Beta," a *WaPo* spokesperson [told *TheWrap*]()*.* "Only if they prove to be successful for the customer do they then get launched. As stated clear on Your Personal Podcast, it is currently in Beta." *WaPo* launched its "Your Personal Podcast" feature last week, sparking immediate dissent in its ranks. Staffers were [furious about the podcast AI]() inventing and misattributing quotes, [*Semafor* reported]() Friday, and even sometimes editorializing on stories. Some staffers questioned the tech's seemingly nonexistent guardrails, [*Status* reported](), while another described it as a "total disaster." Further underscoring the staggering incompetence on display, [followup reporting]() from *Semafor* revealed that *WaPo* had conducted its own tests prior to launching which showed that up to 84 percent of the AI-generated podcasts scripts didn't meet the newspaper's standards — and were therefore unpublishable. There's a significant disconnect between the company's newsroom and its product team in charge of the AI rollout. The podcast's product team sees the errors as a normal part of rolling out a new and still experimental feature, and said it would "iterate through the remaining issues." Similar jargon was on display in the paper's statement to *TheWrap*, and it's equal parts telling and jarring that such tech-minded rhetoric is being deployed in the context of journalism. The AI may not be doing the work of an actual journalist, but it's taking over the role of packaging the news to listeners. Would a human news anchor be given this much leeway, and be allowed to screw up more details than they get right because they're learning on the job, or in tech parlance, "iterating through it"? The *Post* isn't the only newsroom deploying AI. The *New York Times* uses it to help generate headlines, and *Bloomberg's* website features an AI that summarizes its articles. Many publications [have some form of AI chatbot trained on their archives](). But *WaPo* has been particularly AI-evangelistic, signifying its transformation under Jeff Bezos' ownership. Along with deploying AI summaries and an AI chatbot, it also [put forth a plan for letting non-professional writers]() submit articles written with AI. The AI podcasts, however, seem to really have struck a nerve with its staff. "It is truly astonishing that this was allowed to go forward at all," one *WaPo* editor fumed on Slack, per *Semafor*. "Never would I have imagined that the *Washington Post* would deliberately warp its own journalism and then push these errors out to our audience at scale." "If we were serious, we would pull this tool immediately," the editor added. **More on AI:** [*Grok Is Making Wildly Contradictory Claims About Rob Reiner’s Death*]() ## Author At Futurism, my work has often centered on bringing a sense of clarity and insight to complex topics ranging from the regulation of emerging technologies to the esoteric ideologies of Silicon Valley executives, while striving not to lose the poetic sense of awe inspired by often-obscure fields like astrophysics and quantum computing. I broke the story of CNET using AI to produce articles that turned out to be riddled with factual errors and plagiarism — a dam-breaking inflection point, as I've reported, that's inspired copycats and endless discourse while beguiling stakeholders ranging from tech giants to purveyors of spam around the web. My work at Futurism has been cited by publications including CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, Vice, Gizmodo, Engadget, the Verge, and Vanity Fair. I grew up in locales ranging from India to China, and now live in the exotic suburbs of Virginia. In my free time, I'm an avid reader of weird sci-fi literature, an aficionado of East Asian cinema, and, regrettably, a relapsed gamer. Allegedly, I’m working on a debut novel, currently untitled. ### Author social links [Bluesky]()