But AI is limited in its ability to convey human emotions and authenticity, and sports are all about passion, emotion, and thrills
GMA Network stunned folks with its introduction of its latest innovations—two AI sportscasters named Maia and Marco, who started ‘covering’ the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) Season 99 last Sunday.
In their announcement dated Sept. 23, the network called this a “bold step,” the “future of sports broadcasting,” “a groundbreaking initiative,” and other superlatives meant to make us think this is A Good Thing.
It probably is a good thing for GMA.
For one, this is a cost-efficient move – apart from the initial outlay to develop the AI, this saves the network from having to pay, train, and care for human sportscasters.
AI workers are reliable—they never go on vacation or call in sick, they always look good, they never age, and with integrated data feeds, they have all the game scores and players’ statistics instantly on hand.
But how about the human component?
What does this mean for the other network’s human talking heads for news and talk shows— will they get replaced down the line too?
Is this a grand experiment on the network’s part —a trial-and-error look to see how far they can push this, what they’ve called a “[redefinition] of the landscape of modern video production?”
Netizens were quick to respond to the new development.
Some were all praises, which the network played up in another article the same day.
Their headline was about the AI “[sparking] a discussion” on the use of this technology in the media. But the URL of that article reads, “netizens-praise-gma-network-s-first-artificial-intelligence-generated-sportcasters.” Hmm.
There were praises, sure.
On a Sept. 25 post of the network about the AI sportscasters: “Ang galing, this is the future;” “We shouldn’t be scared of change, this is great.”
But there were also brickbats hurled. “See, the delivery is so wooden because there’s no human touch. You can’t even sync the mouth to the voice! It’s a no for me.”
“Ok…I’m not excited… I need anchors or hosts that the emotion goes with the game… good luck!”
“What a big insult from the journalism industry.”
“Nice but scary, AI will take over jobs in the future.”
And this humorous one: “Pati players at fans AI na din soon.”
If GMA is making an experiment, they probably thought introducing a change in sportscasting would make the least waves.
People might have had more of a reaction if they had introduced an AI newscaster.
But AI is limited in its ability to convey human emotions and authenticity, and sports are all about passion, emotion, and thrills.
AI also has limited contextual understanding. While human commentators can draw upon their knowledge of the sport’s history, rivalries, and cultural significance to provide a more meaningful narrative, AI relies only on available data, which does not capture the full essence of the event.
Monotony is also a drawback for AI, as they lack the capacity to adapt to evolving game dynamics or inject humor and wit into their commentary.
This predictability could lead to viewer disengagement and a less enjoyable viewing experience.
On Sept. 24, the University of the Philippines Broadcasting Association released an official statement, saying the group “firmly believes that this move does very little to serve the people as it only sets an alarming precedent that would profoundly impact the future of broadcasting and those who aspire to be in this industry.
“While it is inevitable to adapt these kinds of emerging technologies in the practice of broadcasting, we should not forget that these technologies are mere tools to assist us and improve our work. They should not, in any way, replace and displace the people who have spent years in the study and practice of broadcasting.
“Before we welcome innovation and technological advancements, we must first address the realities faced by media workers – contractualization, unfair labor practices, low compensation and lack of benefits.
“If GMA truly aims to promote inclusivity in their reporting, they should instead focus their efforts and resources on hiring and properly compensating talented journalists and media workers. They should provide more opportunities to people who aspire to be part of the media industry and are working hard to do so.
“Technologies that do not put humans in the center are no innovation at all.”
The use of AI sportscasters could lead to concerns about job displacement in the broadcast industry.
If AI commentary becomes the norm, human sportscasters, even newscasters, could find their roles diminished or replaced entirely.
This could result in job losses and a negative impact on the livelihoods of many professionals in the field.
The rise of AI seems all but unstoppable right now.
But we must remember this development is the result of many human decisions made along the way. Humans made AI, and humans are deciding to put AI front and center.
Humans can also decide to adopt humanist practices and do what’s best for people, rather than for the bottom line.
* * * FB and Twitter: @DrJennyO / Email: writerjennyo@gmail.com
