The Line is Growing Thinner

Newspapers were created by the people, for the people. Though initial purposes may have been to make money, it’s difficult to believe that this was the only purpose for newspapers because if money was the only issue that mattered, then surely there would have been another invention to bring home the bacon. No, newspapers were most definitely (& quite obviously) written to also keep its readers up to date on current events. With that being said, I repeat, newspapers were created by the people, for the people. BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE. PEOPLE. So, if we’re dealing with people here, why does it seem as if we're slowly being replaced?

It used to be where pretty much all a journalist had to look out for was someone who was a better writer- someone higher up on the food chain who had the potential to kick you out of your comfy desk or someone who was potentially more valuable as a writer. So, you kept your pieces coming in a timely manner, made sure your articles were well-written, thought-out, cited, etc, & made sure that people wanted to read what you were writing about (& made sure that others knew just how comfortable you had gotten in that desk & how you intended on staying there). But now, instead of having to watch your back to make sure you don’t lose your promotion to your coworker, or lose your job to a newbie with a “young attitude” & “fresh, hip ideas,” you have to make sure that a machine doesn’t leave you with no where to stand other than the unemployment line.

Granted, when looking at the whole picture, yes, Neimen Reports clearly states that "our concern should not be solely a fear of robots replacing us," but the article does make a few interesting points & got me thinking that sure, perhaps machines aren't a threat to us because the idea of a machine composing its own article is unheard of, not to mention impossible. However, was it not also unheard of & impossible in the time of the first newspapers for a computer to pull stats together on its own? What I'm trying to get at is that a machine can't write its own article... not yet. But with our ever-prospering technology, the line separating what a machine does & what a machine can do is perpetually growing thinner, and it's starting to make me wonder, how long before the two sides bleed into one another? How long until what a machine "can do" becomes what a machine "does?" In short, how long until the already thin line completely disappears?