Chicago Sun-Times sparks backlash after printing largely AI-generated summer reading list packed with errors.
The special insert titled Heat Index: Your Guide to the Best of Summer, produced by King Features (a Hearst syndicate), ran in the Chicago Sun-Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, and others.
The issue started when readers spotted fake sources, fabricated quotes, and books credited to wrong authors. The content was mainly created by ChatGPT, admitted the journalist in charge – who failed to fact-check or verify details. 
Soon after, papers acknowledged the section slipped through with minimal editorial review.
Chicago Sun-Times responded calling it “a learning moment” on AI’s role in journalism.
Editor’s note from the paper:
“Our work is valued – and valuable – because of the humanity behind it.”
The mess contrasts sharply with Italian daily Il Foglio’s AI experiment. The paper ran a month-long, AI-written paper trial monitored closely by journalists who supervised prompts and editing.
Il Foglio editor Claudio Cerasa said the chatbot should be a “colleague,” with AI content labelled clearly, warning against using AI to cut corners or replace human reporters.
“AI is meant to integrate, not replace. Anyone who thinks it is a way to save money is getting it wrong,” Cerasa said.
Experts warn AI isn’t a lifeline for local news. Poorly managed AI content risks trust and quality. Journalism prof Tom Rosenstiel stresses smart AI use, transparency, and editorial oversight to succeed.
“Success depends on newsrooms’ willingness to thoughtfully and responsibly adapt and use AI, and their commitment to transparency and editorial standards.”
The Heat Index debacle highlights AI’s risks without human checks. It’s a cautionary tale as newsrooms juggle cost cuts and AI promises.
