In recent months, several major publishing brands, including <keyword id="22881644" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Cond-Nast" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Condé Nast" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Condé Nast">Condé Nast</keyword>, The Atlantic, and News Corp, have entered partnerships with <keyword id="19918823" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="OpenAI" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="OpenAI" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="OpenAI">OpenAI</keyword>, a leading force in artificial intelligence, to license their content for use in AI products like ChatGPT and SearchGPT. These partnerships are aimed at meeting the growing demand for high-quality, reliable content in the digital age while balancing the needs of both AI companies and traditional publishers, stakeholders have said. As is the case with many CEOs, <keyword id="19918827" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="sam-altman" source="keywords">Sam Altman</keyword> has had a penchant for embroiling himself in controversies since the inception of OpenAI. And a lot of the backlash he receives comes from his rather indiscriminate use of content without waiting for permission from the creators. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="112312441" title="‘Too smart to steal’: AI, made to help, faces backlash for data scraping" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div>Remember when the entrepreneur got into trouble after <keyword id="22881645" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="scarlett-johanssen" source="keywords">Scarlett Johanssen</keyword> accused him of using her voice for OpenAI’s Sky? That’s not it. OpenAI has also been sued by the New York Times and eight other papers on the grounds of copyright infringement after their content was allegedly used to train the AI model. However, the OpenAI CEO seems to be learning from his mistakes and is now pursuing a rather legal route to obtaining content for training his models. Multiple popular and reputable brands have signed deals with OpenAI. And one of the primary reasons publishers are partnering with OpenAI is the shift in how audiences discover information. <h2>You scratch my back, I scratch yours </h2>With generative AI becoming increasingly integrated into search engines and digital assistants, <keyword id="20914562" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="media-companies" source="keywords">media companies</keyword> are increasingly seeing opportunities to expand their reach through these platforms. For instance, Condé Nast CEO Roger Lynch emphasised the importance of “meeting audiences where they are” and embracing new technologies that can enhance the visibility of the company’s content. By partnering with OpenAI, Condé Nast and others hope to regain some of the revenue lost due to changes in traditional search and social media algorithms, which have negatively impacted publishers’ traffic and ad revenues. Another key benefit for publishers is ensuring proper attribution and compensation for their intellectual property. The licensing deals with OpenAI and other AI firms attempt to address these issues, ensuring that publishers are compensated for their contributions to AI training models. For example, some deals, like the one News Corp signed with OpenAI, are valued in the hundreds of millions of dollars, providing substantial revenue streams to news organisations that might otherwise struggle to monetize their <keyword id="20354989" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="digital-content" source="keywords">digital content</keyword>. <h2>The grass may not be greener on the other side </h2>Publications are likely making this switch and partnering with OpenAI to “keep up with changing times”. But these deals are not without their challenges. Some critics argue that by cooperating with AI companies, publishers are effectively “settling without litigation” and sacrificing their hard-earned credibility for short-term financial gain. There is a fear that these deals may lead to AI-generated summaries of news stories overshadowing original reporting, which could undermine the value of <keyword id="20016198" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="journalism" source="keywords">journalism</keyword> in the long run. Unionised editorial employees at Condé Nast, for instance, have expressed concerns about how AI might impact their work and whether it could lead to a degradation of journalistic standards. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="112274629" title="Sam Altman and generative AI can&amp;#39;t be trusted, says leading expert" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div>Additionally, there are ethical concerns about AI’s role in the spread of misinformation. If generative AI systems fail to accurately reflect the nuance and context of human-written journalism, they could inadvertently amplify false or misleading narratives. This is a significant worry for media companies that have spent years building trust with their audiences. Ultimately, while partnerships between publishers and AI companies like OpenAI offer potential benefits — such as increased reach, better compensation, and adaptation to new content discovery methods — there are notable risks involved. The media industry is at a crossroads, trying to navigate the delicate balance between leveraging AI for growth and protecting the integrity of quality journalism. As the landscape evolves, it remains to be seen whether these partnerships will help or hinder the future of publishing. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="112678305" title="Falling in love with a user to telling them to eat rocks to stay fit, times when AI went wrong" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div>

OpenAI is finally buying rights from major publishing companies! But, what’s the future of journalism?

<ul class="summary-list"><li><a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-altman-chatgpt-openai-ceo-career-net-worth-ycombinator-prepper-2023-1">OpenAI CEO Sam Altman</a> has faced a lot of negative press recently, impacting his once-clean image.</li><li>Not least among the controversies was the collapse of OpenAI's safety team.</li></ul>OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has been hit with a bout of bad press in the past few weeks, which has <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-sam-altman-new-era-tech-villian-chatgpt-safety-2024-5">cast a shadow</a> over his once-squeaky-clean image. There was the fumble with <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/scarlett-johansson-angry-chatgpt-voice-declined-offer-openai-sam-altman-2024-5">OpenAI's new AI assistant</a>, whose voice resembled Scarlett Johanssen in the movie "Her." There was also the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-altman-brockman-defend-safety-sutskever-leike-quit-2024-5">abrupt breakdown of OpenAI's safety team</a>, which raised doubts about the company's commitment to responsible AI development.Amid these swirling dramas, legendary tech investor Paul Graham defended Altman by putting an old rumor to rest. Altman wasn't fired from his post as president of the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/y-combinator-founders-reveal-repeat-accelerator-progam-demo-day-2019-8">famed startup accelerator, Y Combinator</a>, Graham wrote in a post on X on Thursday. Graham cofounded the accelerator in 2005, and Altman served as its president from 2014 to 2019. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet">I got tired of hearing that YC fired Sam, so here's what actually happened: <a href="https://t.co/3YvBDH7oqV">pic.twitter.com/3YvBDH7oqV</a>— Paul Graham (@paulg) <a href="https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1796107666265108940?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 30, 2024</a></blockquote> According to Graham, Altman was simultaneously running OpenAI and Y Combinator until OpenAI announced the creation of a new for-profit entity in 2019 and selected Altman as president. Graham said he and his wife, Y Combinator's cofounder Jessica Livingston, told Atlman that if he wanted to work at OpenAI, they'd find another person to run Y Combinator."If he'd said that he was going to find someone else to be CEO of OpenAI so that he could focus 100% on YC, we'd have been fine with that too," Graham wrote. "We didn't want him to leave, just to choose one or the other.

Veteran investor Paul Graham breaks down why Sam Altman left Y Combinator 

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Studios are transitioning back to traditional movie releases after the pandemic upended how they were premiered.</li><li>However, the theatrical release windows will now be 45 days, shorter than the pre-pandemic 90 days.</li></ul>It looks like pandemic-era movie theater and <keyword id="572624" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Streaming">streaming</keyword> service dual-releases will soon be coming to an end.Disney, Paramount, and now <keyword id="14846" type="COMPANY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Warner-Bros-">Warner Bros.</keyword> have agreed to exclusive theater release windows, signaling an end to platforms like <keyword id="7849400" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="HBO-Max">HBO Max</keyword> and Disney+ showing new <keyword id="406" type="ENTERTAINMENT" weightage="60" keywordseo="Movies">movies</keyword> at the same time as theaters. However, there does seem to be one semi-permanent change from the pre-pandemic world: movies will be shown for a shorter amount of time in theaters before they land online, meaning you can watch new films at home sooner than before.AMC, the largest theater chain operator in the US, announced <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/reviews/out?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fool.com%2Fearnings%2Fcall-transcripts%2F2021%2F08%2F10%2Famc-entertainment-holdings-amc-q2-2021-earnings-ca%2F%3Fsource%3Desa003ads0010001%26campaign%3D78888%26pc_source%3DTheMotleyFool_Awin%26awc%3D12195_1628700344_f9a2a73d8fc2451af9ab9cef292be03f%26utm_source%3Daw%26utm_campaign%3D78888">Monday</a> a deal with Warner Bros. to ensure movies are shown in theaters for 45 days before landing online. That 45-day window is much shorter than the traditional 75 to 90 days.Reports had previously surfaced in March that <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-major-hollywood-movie-studios-are-collapsing-the-theatrical-window-2021-3">Warner Bros. was axing its direct-to-streaming releases</a> and returning to exclusive theater debuts in 2022. And the studio made a deal with Regal Cinemas' Cineworld earlier this year to show movies for 45 days in theaters before offering them online.Its movies planned for 2022, like "The Batman," now will first be released exclusively to theaters before being offered online.Disney said on a May <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/13/disneys-shang-chi-and-free-guy-will-have-45-day-theatrical-run.html">earnings call</a> that it is also transitioning back to exclusive theater releases, albeit with the shorter 45-day window. And Paramount <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-major-hollywood-movie-studios-are-collapsing-the-theatrical-window-2021-3">made a similar deal</a> for its tentpole movies like "Mission: Impossible 7" to have 45-day slots.Streaming saw a huge rise in popularity since March 2020 as pandemic-driven shutdowns closed movie theaters and people sought at-home <keyword id="4578" type="COMPANY" weightage="100" keywordseo="entertainment">entertainment</keyword>. Studios like Warner Bros., which operates the HBO Max platform, were forced to survive via dual movie releases - movies like "Zack Snyder's Justice League," "Wonder Woman 1984," and "Godzilla vs. Kong" aired on HBO Max during the pandemic. Disney+ similarly offered the live-action remake of "Mulan" online at the same time as it was shown in theaters. Many in the filmmaking world speculated whether or not dual-releases would be the death knell for traditional cinema. Directors Christopher Nolan, Patty Jenkins, and "Blade Runner 2049"'s <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/10/22168881/denis-villeneuve-christopher-nolan-anger-hbo-max-streaming-att">Denis Villeneuve</a> have all expressed concern over the move.We saw one of the first sticky byproducts of the decision earlier this month when actress <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/scarlett-johansson-disney-lawsuit-black-widow-could-change-hollywood-2021-8">Scarlett Johanssen filed a lawsuit against Disney over its "Black Widow" dual release</a>, arguing that the studio violated her contract.She and other actors earn their salaries largely based on box office performance, a cut that the lawsuit says could have been greater had the movie not simultaneously been released online. "Black Widow" earned $158 million worldwide in theaters, while Disney raked in $60 million in home sales for the movie.

You Searched For "scarlett johanssen" and got 3 results

OpenAI is finally buying rights from major publishing companies! But, what’s the future of journalism?

Ashmita Gupta

Veteran investor Paul Graham breaks down why Sam Altman left Y Combinator

Lakshmi Varanasi

The pandemic didn't kill traditional movie releases, but it does mean you can watch new films at home sooner

Katie Canales