AI – Mitchell's thoughts, photos, etc.

What Does AI Really Know About You?

How Accurate Is It?

By Mitchell Slepian

I read on a social media platform to do a deep AI search of yourself. You should see what people find about you when they search for you. It’s a good idea.

These days, organizations do that as a pre-employment check, potential dating partners check you out and organizations do it to see if you’re okay to volunteer with them. This is only the top of the list.

Maybe you read my May 15 post, “Is AI Really That Smart?” I discuss its accuracy and your need to verify. AI is a great tool, and it is forging ahead. We are in the midst of a revolution. We are also at a learning stage.

The other day, I took the advice from my reading and did an AI search on myself. I used Google. I have found that it and X’s Grok offer the easiest and quickest searches. Was what I found about me accurate? Yes and no. Was it concerning? Not really. Was it funny? A little. Was it slightly misleading? Yes.

Let’s jump into it. It quickly found my employment records. All it did was search LinkedIn. It was fairly accurate. It didn’t pull up the timing I had for certain roles. But it was not terribly off. My LinkedIn profile is accurate as the platform allows. That’s the simple stuff.

I asked it about my interests. It quickly pulled up my loves: the Yankees, summer camp, and theater, particularly at Lincoln Center. I am in love with the fountain. I’d love to jump into it. That’d be way cooler than jumping into the one at Washington Square Park. I have been in that one when there was no water in it. I’d have no problem jumping it when the water was in it. People do it every day. Lincoln Center’s fountain is too classy. Maybe they can do a fundraiser and let people pay to jump in. I’d donate and jump.

I asked it some questions. It said I was an avid Knicks fan, and I do not follow the NFL. I only follow MLB. I am not a Knicks fan. Sure, I am rooting for them in the championship. I have never watched a basketball game in my life. I was once offered tickets in the area Spike Lee sits. I turned them down because I was attending a more exciting (at least in my mind) event at the Plaza Hotel. Google told me to I check the scores of their games. During the final game of the playoff round, I checked once while I was watching the Bronx Bombers. As a New Yorker, I felt the need to know. I was glad they won. Does this constitute me being a hardcore fan? No way.

I asked it about my family. It noted that my father passed away. It mentioned my mom was an RN. It said, “I am very close to my sister, and we travel regularly to Long Island for photo shoots.” I do a lot of photo shoots. My photography is mostly shot at Coney Island, Scout camps, my European vacations, and the East and Hudson Rivers. My first one on Long Island will be next week at Baiting Hollow Scout Camp. My sister will not be there. She has never been to any of my photo shoots. Oh, the ones I allegedly do on the Island are shots of the stars. I tried that once in Forest Hills. One day, I will try again. It also said someone who is not my sister is.

I asked it what music I like. It said the top of my lists are Sir Elton, Billy Joel, and it claimed I don’t like the Beatles. I love the Fab Four. It expanded to list my new-wave and punk loves – The Clash, The Cure, Depeche Mode, Echo and the Bunnymen, and others. It left out my favorite band, U2. Was it right or wrong about music? I am not sure. Google pulled stuff from my blogs. In some of them, I mentioned what I listen to while I am writing or editing photography. All of these bands are in there. For the record, I am listening to goth right now. So, I guess AI was making educated guesses.

Rock Lake in Kunatah, Ten Mile River Scout Camps

It noted “Rent” is my favorite show. Hands down, it is. It pulled up my volunteer work and my role as chairman of the Ten Mile River Scout Museum. It mentioned my other volunteer work and attendance at religious services. It might have made me too religious. It is what it is.

It chronicled my Scouting America history. It noted that I was the chief of the former Aquehongian Lodge #112 and that I am an Eagle Scout. It got a few other things right and some things wrong. Funny thing is, I searched on the same terms two days in a row. One day it said this. The next day, it said that. It also pulled my fiction blogs and looped what my characters are doing as me. Most of the characters are based on me. That has never been mentioned. So maybe AI figured that out.

Bottom line, AI is getting there. Is it 100 percent accurate? Will it ever be? Probably not. But will it be really close? No doubt about it. Should you use it as your final check to judge a future hire or date? No. Should you still verify and check other sources? Absolutely.

What Do People Want to Read?

Where Do Their Interests Lie?

By Mitchell Slepian

We all know we are swamped by too much copy. Whether it be news, fiction, non-fiction, or social media posts. We can agree that social media falls between fiction and non-fiction. We all know people who swear by it and believe everything that’s posted.

Some of you know, for many years, I have been working on a graphic novel. It is taking too long. I need an illustrator. For those of you following, Marc, Alana, Anat, and the rest of the bunch, I thank you. There will be more soon enough.

The questions on my mind are: What are people interested in reading, and how can I get them to read it? As a PR professional, I was taught that when pitching a journalist, I need to explain why a story is newsworthy and why readers will care. I remember creating the American Institute of CPA’s (AICPA) Economic Outlook Survey Index. The AICPA had an economic outlook survey. No one cared about it. Duke University and CFO Magazine partnered on one. Several other universities had a survey I wanted ours to reach new heights. At the time, we did it with North Carolina State University. I spoke to trusted reporters at Bloomberg, Dow Jones Newswires, and a few other media outlets. The journalists told me to create one index. I got approval and did it. I offered embargoed data to Bloomberg, Dow Jones, and The New York Times. All of them ran it. That was in 2011. The survey continues to run and gets top-tier media coverage. I have long left the AICPA. But now I was able to create something that people wanted to read.

I have been writing blogs on many topics, including but not limited to AI and how it is shaping our future, Coney Island, how people try to sit anywhere at shows and games at Madison Square Garden, Yankee Stadium, and other venues, the Staten Island Ferry, etc.

The Drop on the Cyclone, Luna Park, Brooklyn, NY

My blog about Coney Island and the Ferry got many clicks. The AI blog got several comments on LinkedIn. But one person read it. Weird. I wrote about LinkedIn. People did read it. Did it reach the numbers of Coney Island and the ferry? Not even close. I know from my PR work that certain industry trades carry a lot of weight. Their circulation numbers are not high. But consistent placement in those outlets leads to top-tier media, such as The Wall Street Journal.

The Ferry Sailing By the Verrazzano–Narrows Bridge

I know my blog posts are not at the level of the top trades and media. But I have a small but growing following. My AI post would have opened up new areas. Maybe we haven’t gotten there with AI yet. Or we are over exposed, and people are taking a break from reading about it.

The question remains: are people more interested in things that are changing and reshaping our world? Or, would they rather read about the things they grew up with and are closest to?

Is AI Really That Smart?

Or Is It Just a Tool?

By Mitchell Slepian

We are all using AI. We are all worried about it. Will it cancel our jobs? Will it take over? How useful is it? Will we see AI-created art the next time we visit the Guggenheim?

We are the beginnings of a new phase. We could be a little further into it. The questions raised are is it smarter than us? There are many answers. To begin, we have seen so many industries change. At one point, there were a few news stations we’d watch on our TV sets. Then came 24-hour cable news programs. Now they stream and it is all over social media. We used to listen to music on records, reel-to-reelss, 8-track, the trusty old cassette, and then the “modern” CD. Now we listen to it digitally on our phones, laptops, Alexa, etc.

I just completed working on a video for an organization I chair. The producer used Speechify for the narration. Did it solve our needs? Did it create more work? Yes and No. Sure, it took the voice narrative and created a transcript. It saved time. Did it spell things right? No. Con Edison became “Khan Edison.” We didn’t have Star Trek characters in our video. I wish. Did it spell people’s surnames right? Yes and No. A few times, it spelled a name correctly at the beginning of the video and butchered it elsewhere. Did it pronounce things right? Yes and No. It can’t capture ethnic accents. It certainly provided a lot of help. But we wanted our video to sound authentic, with that Brooklynese and Staten Island sound. Was it useful to our process? Totally. What did we learn? The apps are super helpful. Are they foolproof? No. Should we continue to use and expand our use? Yes.

There are tools like Grammarly to do grammar checks. Word does it. Do they get everything? No. These tools often make mistakes with proper nouns and trademarked names, and they are obsessed with the Oxford or serial comma. Some style manuals (APA and Chicago) use it. At the same time, some (AP) does not. Wordsmiths will continue to debate this. Do we need the clarity it provides, or should we save space? Will AI learn this? Will it make suggestions to steer you in the right direction? I bet it will.

These tools suggest other words than what you wrote. Are they accurate? It is a mixed bag. You can run the same copy through the app multiple times. Try using different apps. It is like looking at multiple weather apps. One says rain. The says heat wave. These apps have similarities. It often gives different grades and suggestions each time. You can get a 100 on round two and a 94 on round three. I doubt that in the span of five minutes, it is being reprogrammed to catch new things. But it does clean things up and gives you a good idea of what needs improvement. It is up to you to use the tools to fix things.

AI works great when building press lists for PR pros. It can do a deep dive into a media outlet and pull up key contact information, deadlines, and submission requirements. It is great when doing research. It is great when doing background information on companies you want to do business with. Sometimes, using Google’s Gemini or X’s Grok, you get quicker results than searching a corporate website.

But when using it, you must verify. Do some quick research to make sure things are accurate. Proof it. Do not trust it 100 percent. It will always get better and become a more useful tool. Of course, we need to remember it is only as smart as those who programmed it. But in many ways, we are getting smarter by challenging ourselves to be more innovative.