Bring on the AI overlords: from a content marketer
Artificial intelligence (AI). Just saying the words invokes visions of an apocalyptic future teeming with deadly machines like The Terminator or even software like The Matrix’s Agent Smith. At least that’s the dystopia the scaremongers are peddling. If the latest hype is anything to go by, AI will not only change life on earth as we know it, it will probably take your job too.
As an editor, content marketer and millennial, it appears my head is on the chopping block. Gartner predicts that by 2018, 20 per cent of business content will be authored by machines, and many are speculating that journalists will cease to exist. Add Elon Musk comparing AI to a demon, and even I’m spooked.
But I won’t pack up my desk just yet. Here’s why.
We’re surrounded by AI
Let’s be honest: this is nothing new. Artificial intelligence, machine learning and automation have been around for quite a while, and we’ve all been targeted by Facebook’s AI-applied targeted advertising and subject to Google AdWords’ AI-powered, automated bidding for years.
Your top picks on Netflix? AI technology fuels its recommendation engine. Apple’s personal assistant, Siri? She’s machine learning to better predict, understand and answer your questions. Google? Depends on AI to rank your search results.
But the machines haven’t taken over yet. Despite it trickling into everyday life, AI is still in its infancy. Instead of conjuring images of alien robots, we should really think of the technology as a baby Bicentennial Man in nappies – waiting for us to teach it.
AI is growing up fast
To be useful for content marketing, AI needs a mammoth amount of fresh, structured data.
Its power lies in its ability to analyse large data sets to reveal patterns and trends. Feed it enough high-quality data and it will be able to predict share prices or a human’s lifespan and, in some cases, even write content.
Natural language generation (NLG) is a type of AI software capable of producing coherent, readable text. NLG robo-journalists are already creating basic sports content and corporate earnings reports. But, as smart as it is, NLG isn’t truly independent – it needs very specific data sets and templates before it can write, and it can’t create anything genuinely new.
Still, that doesn’t mean we can’t use the technology. In the realm of content marketing, AI can gather, sort and make sense of oceans of data – something the industry is swimming in.
AI: Spotting trends, making predictions
Ask any marketer and they’ll tell you they’re ‘data driven’.
Sure, we’re data driven. We look at engagement metrics to tell us what’s working, and change things accordingly to make them work better and inform future decisions. But it’s generally retrospective.
A lot of what we do is still based on instinct. We still speak to real people. We still search online to understand what people are asking. We still study search volumes.
What we need is the ability to predict something before it needs to be changed. This is where the opportunity for AI is in content marketing right now.
Exciting stuff for a content marketer working in a media and data intelligence business. We’re already using our own AI to process seven million news items every day, at a rate of 234 stories per second.
With that much data, our software can make strong recommendations about what type of content we should be creating, and for whom. As it evolves (and learns), it should be able to spot trends and patterns early, informing communications strategies and helping businesses to maximise opportunity and minimise risk.
Humans and AI, living together
AI and predictive analytics will help content marketers understand who they should be talking to and what they should be saying, but it’s up to us to create the content.
AI relies on human data and intelligence to function and learn. At least for now, this is where its limitations lie.
Humans are still needed to create original work that connects with its audience at an emotional level. To completely replace a writer or content marketer, AI would need to have an opinion, think abstractly, be curious and show emotion.
So, while your inbox might be full of propaganda alluding to our impending cyberdoom, we’re not there yet.
However, we shouldn’t be naïve, as the way we work is being transformed. To stay in the game, we should spearhead the change rather than hiding in the corner.
I for one welcome working with our new robot overlords, and I urge you all to join me. As the machine said, “Come with me if you want to live.”
Disclaimer: This article was not written by a robot.
Loren is an experienced marketing professional who translates data and insights using Isentia solutions into trends and research, bringing clients closer to the benefits of audience intelligence. Loren thrives on introducing the groundbreaking ways in which data and insights can help a brand or organisation, enabling them to exceed their strategic objectives and goals.
The immediate challenge is not killer robots, its job replacement. If individuals are automated out of jobs, the future for society is bleak.
Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here?
The robots are coming. Although often spoken of in future tense, the truth is machine learning is well and truly here. Without realising, consumers interact with ‘smart’ technology at almost every touch point; from robotic vacuums to facial recognition technology, artificial intelligence (AI) is helping to complete tasks faster, cheaper and – sometimes - more effectively than ever before.
In an economy that’s driven by speed and efficiency, it should come as no surprise that a computer’s ability to communicate at a trillion bits per second is favoured above the human capability of about 10 bits.
McKinsey recently reported that 40 per cent of work tasks can be automated using existing technology, prompting everyone from factory workers to lawyers and accountants to consider the threat of being replaced by robots as not just inevitable, but imminent.
For technologists, we are witnessing first-hand how this emerging field is transforming the companies we work for.
In my work at Isentia, we use machine learning to process seven million news items each day. Not long ago this was a task relegated performed solely by humans with the mind-numbing task of flipping through newspapers in search of stories that might relate to a client.
We have a duty to empower those around us to learn everything they can about what their job may evolve into in order to become the very best man-machine partner possible.
Today, machines trawl video, audio and digital content across over 5,500 new sites at a rate of 234 stories per second and present meaningful summaries to clients in real-time.
Whether a story breaks on Twitter and then spills across news platforms and onto television and radio, machine learning can track and analyse how a story evolves with 99 per cent accuracy.
While AI is revolutionising the way that we work, the impact is far greater for those in the tech industry.
In our mission to develop software that can learn complex problems without needing to be taught how, the success of the AI industry ultimately comes down to technology professionals: our ability to automate, and the pace at which we expand the field of machine learning.
With an annual growth rate of 19.7 per cent percent (predicted to be worth $15.3 billion by 2019), it’s safe to say our foot is well and truly on the pedal. While this relies greatly on our technical capabilities, it is something that challenges many of us ethically: what set of values should AI be aligned with?
Two of the greatest technologists of our times, Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking, have spoken about both the potential benefit and the harm that an AI arms race could deliver. An eradication of disease is not unfathomable, but nor is a threat to humanity. They hold grave concerns as to whether or not robots can be controlled against misuse or malfunction.
While thought provoking, the immediate challenge is not killer robots, it’s job replacement. Employment may not seem like an ethical problem, but if individuals are automated out of jobs, the future for society is bleak.
While the phrase ‘Thank God it’s Friday’ has forged its way into the 9-to-5 vernacular, for most people, jobs create a huge sense of personal and professional satisfaction… not to mention a means to pay bills.
An apocalypse might be somewhat melodramatic, however I do agree that it is important to consider just how closely we should merge biological and digital intelligence.
Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here? It’s both exciting and terrifying. The last time we experienced a revolution like this was in the early 1900s when cars, telephones and the airplane all emerged at once.
Contrary to the hype, there lies an enormous opportunity for humans to work with artificial intelligence, not be replaced by it.
Make no mistake: at some level every job can be carried out by a robot. But there are certain jobs, particularly in technology, that require decision making, planning or coding software.
While computers do a brilliant job of executing well-defined activities - such as telling us the fastest route to get from home to work - it is safe to say that humans are an essential component of goal setting, interpreting results, humour, sarcasm and implementing common sense checks.
The most difficult jobs to automate are those that involve managing and developing people. While in this industry most of our jobs are safe (for now), we should heed the advice of Musk and Hawkings and protect those outside our field by proceeding with caution. How then to facilitate human and robots working together harmoniously without the workforce morphing into cyborgs? The secret is to not sail out farther we can row back.
As technologists, we also have a duty to empower those around us to learn everything they can about what their job may evolve into in order to become the very best man-machine partner possible. It's the best, and most ethical, way to prepare for the inevitable advent of AI.
First publish in CIO New Zealand
Andrea Walsh, CIO
"
["post_title"]=>
string(39) "It's time to slow down the AI arms race"
["post_excerpt"]=>
string(92) "Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here?"
["post_status"]=>
string(7) "publish"
["comment_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["ping_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["post_password"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_name"]=>
string(38) "its-time-to-slow-down-the-ai-arms-race"
["to_ping"]=>
string(0) ""
["pinged"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_modified"]=>
string(19) "2019-06-26 01:01:55"
["post_modified_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2019-06-26 01:01:55"
["post_content_filtered"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_parent"]=>
int(0)
["guid"]=>
string(43) "https://isentiastaging.wpengine.com/?p=1829"
["menu_order"]=>
int(0)
["post_type"]=>
string(4) "post"
["post_mime_type"]=>
string(0) ""
["comment_count"]=>
string(1) "0"
["filter"]=>
string(3) "raw"
}
Blog
It’s time to slow down the AI arms race
Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here?
In our last update, housing coverage centred on advice for mortgage holders amid rising rates and cost-of-living pressures. In this second release of the series, the conversation has shifted, with news increasingly framing Australia’s housing challenge through construction, innovation, and government action. Reports highlight fast-tracked developments, AI-powered modular builds, and reforms to cut red tape, alongside community-driven projects in Nhulunbuy and pressures on urban infrastructure, showing that solving the crisis requires building both faster and smarter. The patterns in coverage reveal which stories and policy levers are gaining traction, and how different angles from scale and efficiency to localised community impact are shaping the wider conversation.
Government policy is driving much of this coverage, shaping the narratives that dominate media discussion. First-home buyer programs such as the Home Guarantee (5% Deposit Scheme), Help to Buy, and Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee are frequently cited, alongside social and affordable housing initiatives including the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, NSW’s $610 million Social Housing Accelerator Fund, and state-level projects in Toowoomba and Wagga Wagga. Coverage of supply-side reforms, Melbourne high-rise plans, and debates over negative gearing, capital gains, and rental caps illustrates how policy and regulation frame public debate. Across outlets and regions, the way these stories are told signals which elements of housing policy are resonating, which have momentum, and where attention is likely to shift next.
Where previous reporting centred on interest rates and mortgage advice, a calm, and financial “top-down” discussion, the shift to construction and reform places the emphasis on system-level solutions. Yet, as before, a gap remains between media coverage and social discourse.
On social media, the conversation continues to unfold as a “bottom-up” outcry. This month, debates over housing affordability and accessibility have been increasingly framed through immigration. Political groups such as Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and the Family First Party Australia are amplifying anti-immigration narratives on X and Facebook, claiming that new arrivals are the direct cause of housing stress. These messages are countered by voices rejecting both the logic and the racism seen to underpin such rhetoric, instead pointing to investors as the real drivers of market pressures and reframing housing as a human right. Demonstrations such as March for Australia have further fuelled this dynamic, with slogans tying immigration to Labor, raising the risk of political damage.
The conversation shows right-leaning voices continue to dominate online, with more balanced perspectives struggling for visibility. Policy proposals like a “bedroom tax” appear to have amplified anxieties about population growth, giving further oxygen to anti-immigration claims.
Layered over this, the Reserve Bank’s three rate cuts in recent months have become a fresh point of contention. Some argue that lower rates are simply inflating house prices, benefiting existing homeowners while worsening conditions for would-be buyers and savers deepening the perception of a system stacked against the public.
While the media is foregrounding structural solutions to increase supply, public discourse is still driven by frustration, identity politics, and competing narratives of blame. Solving the housing crisis will not only require practical reforms but also careful navigation of the volatile public conversation that risks overshadowing those solutions.
Housing narratives in the media and online: Building solutions, blaming people
In our last update, housing coverage centred on advice for mortgage holders amid rising rates and cost-of-living pressures. In this second release of the series, the conversation has shifted, with news increasingly framing Australia’s housing challenge through construction, innovation, and government action. Reports highlight fast-tracked developments, AI-powered modular builds, and reforms to cut red tape, […]
How is media coverage shaping views of Brisbane 2032 and its global impact?
The stories that resonate, whether it is a stadium cost blowout, a community campaign to preserve green space, or the push to include Australian Rules Football in the program, capture how Australians are gearing up for a once-in-a-generation Games. These specific, contested, and human stories shape the narratives across news and social media and ultimately reflect how the country is experiencing and remembering Brisbane 2032.
Leading Topics: News vs. social
The difference is while the news media is overwhelmingly concerned with the logistics of the Games, the public is more interested in its social and economic consequences.
On social media, the conversation is a mix of excitement and concern, with a strong focus on what the Games will feel like. Discussions about social impact and economic outcomes are prominent, as people debate everything from housing affordability to the potential for new community arts programs.
In the news, the narrative is far more narrow. An incredible amount of the coverage is dedicated to infrastructure, with a particular focus on the cost and controversy surrounding the main stadium. The second-largest topic is the political jousting that accompanies these infrastructure debates.
The most discussed stakeholders are institutions and communities, not individuals
While politicians dominate the news, what's making a real impact on social media are the communities and institutions at the heart of the conversation.
In the news, the most-quoted voices around Brisbane 2032 are overwhelmingly political figures, led by the Queensland Premier and Deputy Premier. Much of the coverage has centred on Premier Crisafulli’s media appearances, including a notable stop at Rockhampton’s Fitzroy River to promote plans for a feasibility study into using the site for rowing events despite concerns about crocodiles and currents.
The Deputy Premier, meanwhile, has been most prominent for his push to build a new stadium at Victoria Park. That proposal has fuelled debate over whether Brisbane 2032 is shifting away from being a sporting project to a political land grab. The discussion is further sharpened by Queensland’s reported shortage of tradies, with calls for urgent measures to recruit more skilled workers to meet the surge in construction and infrastructure demand tied to the Games.
Even Donald Trump makes an appearance in the coverage, with Brisbane’s bid to host the Quad Leaders’ Summit drawing headlines and gaining the support of Prime Minister Albanese.
On social media, the conversation is being shaped largely by organisations and grassroots communities. Victoria Park, now at the centre of the stadium debate, has become a focal point for how people see the legacy of Brisbane 2032, and Queensland more broadly. Campaigns to preserve the green space are gaining traction, amplified both by smaller local outlets such as The Westender and by national publications including ABC and The Guardian.
Defining "legacy": The public hopes and media narratives
The term "legacy" represents the most significant challenge in the Brisbane 2032 narrative, as the data reveals a mismatch between the public's focus on experience and the media's framing of cost and conflict.
On social media, the legacy conversation is aspirational and driven by the sporting theme, where discussions about preserving green spaces like Victoria Park highlight a desire for tangible, long-term community benefits. Other cities are also seizing the aspirational momentum of events like Brisbane 2032, with figures such as Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate using social media to highlight for hyper-local audiences the potential returns on investing in this opportunity. News coverage frames legacy as a political and economic undertaking, dominated by the cost of stadiums, the allocation of funding, and the political conflict between the government and its opposition.
Framing the use of the Fitzroy River as an opportunity for sustainability or presenting construction timelines as local job creation makes the connection between political debates and the community and sporting outcomes people truly care about more resonant, while also painting a positive vision for the legacy of Brisbane 2032.
Specificity wins: Vague PR is ignored, detailed stories drive engagement
Generic ‘good news’ posts or Olympic press tend to generate weaker engagement The content that captures public attention is highly specific, and often human-centric or controversial.
On social media, the most engaging content included the debate around HYROX judging standards, the passionate campaign to include Lawn Bowls in the games, and celebrating the specific achievements of individual swimmers.
In the news, it’s not the general updates that resonate, but detailed reports, whether on cost blowouts at specific venues, the impact of turning a local river into an Olympic event site, or the campaign to include Australian Rules Football in the program.
Media moments and narratives gain traction when meaning is applied. Shift content strategies from generalities to detailed storytelling, focus on journeys, the tangible impact of a new community facility, or a transparent explanation of a complex issue for example. The battle for the hearts and minds of the public ahead of Brisbane 2032 will be won in these details.
See how the right analysis can help you anticipate risks, shape messaging and connect with your audiences. Request a free demo.
Winning the Brisbane 2032 narrative: A media analysis
How is media coverage shaping views of Brisbane 2032 and its global impact? The stories that resonate, whether it is a stadium cost blowout, a community campaign to preserve green space, or the push to include Australian Rules Football in the program, capture how Australians are gearing up for a once-in-a-generation Games. These specific, contested, […]
Every stakeholder relationship is different, and managing them effectively takes more than a one-size-fits-all approach.
From campaign planning to long-term engagement, having the right tools and strategy in place can make the difference between missed connections and meaningful impact.
This guide covers:
Identifying and understanding your key stakeholders
Mapping and modelling for influence and engagement
Equipping your team to maintain and grow strategic relationships
