Using Artificial Intelligence in sports writing takes away the voices of real people and is just another way for big companies to cut costs.
ESPN is the main culprit of this, publicly admitting in a press release to begin using AI game recaps for all Premier Lacrosse League (PLL) and National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL) games in 2024.
The claim from ESPN is that using AI allows more coverage for under-served sports, giving leagues that did not previously have game recaps on their digital platforms more coverage.
“These sports do not currently have game recaps on ESPN digital platforms, and these AI-generated recaps will be a tool to augment existing coverage – not replace it,” the release says.
Sports Illustrated was also caught using AI-generated stories, before deleting them all once they were caught.
So that leads to the burning question: why turn to AI rather than a human to cover these sports? Why can’t they hire writers to do the job they’ve turned to AI to cover?
In my opinion, it all comes down to cost-cutting. It’s yet another way to pay human writers less or paying fewer writers while still being able to pump out digital content.
It’s no secret the world of sports journalism is changing.
To circle back to our two AI examples, ESPN has gone through dozens of layoffs over the past year, while Sports Illustrated let go nearly their entire unionized staff in early 2024, leaving some wondering about the future of the once behemoth magazine before it was rescued by a licensing deal with Minute Media.
So, it’s clear these companies are looking for ways to cut operating costs in a time of change.
But the point of this column isn’t to talk about the changing nature of sports journalism. It’s to highlight that AI-written pieces are not the solution.
Human writing simply cannot be replaced by that of an AI. Even when checked for accuracy by a human editor, AI-written stories can only tell you what the data or prompt presented to them says.
AI doesn’t know the narrative heading into the game, it doesn’t see the incredible goal, the big save, or the slam dunk. It lacks the vision and the passion of sports writers, like the historical giants Saul "Red" Fisher of the Montreal Gazette, Trent Frayne of the Toronto Star and Trent Frayne who wrote for the best of the country's newspapers. They brought the passion for sports to life and the agony of losing championships into people's living rooms.
AI just sees the data point laid out, or someone telling it that happened.
Take, for example, U.S. women’s soccer legend Alex Morgan’s final professional game for the NWSL’s San Diego Wave on Sept. 8.
The original AI-written match recap on ESPN had no mention of her. Only after it was publicly put out that this massive hole was gaping in the recap was it fixed to include a mention of Morgan.
If issues like this fall through the cracks, and require human editing, maybe it makes more sense to just have real people write these match recaps.
AI in sports writing is an industry trend that we can’t let pick up steam. It’s time to look towards the future of sports journalism. A future that highlights stories written by humans, not artificial intelligence.
No matter the cost.
