I've literally never heard of those horrible companies mentioned in the post. I have no idea what they do. In that sense, maybe Ed's bad at PR? Honestly I've been following Ed's work for a long time now and I'm also a frequent critic online of genAI, so I don't really understand this swinging at him with a bat. He's been a net positive for the movement, no question. Also the line about how he's an ass on social media…that's his brand. He's always roasting everyone. He also roasts himself, when he's not ironically making himself out to be a genius (in that winking British way). If you don't like that sort of humor, fine, but I think it's pretty weird to take it too seriously. 🤷🏻♂️
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2025
0 points (50.0% liked)
Fuck AI
4469 readers
732 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I’ve literally never heard of those horrible companies
If Ed wasn't working for them, maybe you would have.
I admit I’m a fan of his blog, but where is the evidence of this supposed hypocritical conflict? The post alluded to a lot of it but didn’t present any real case other than vague accusations.
I guess the author takes it as a given that we are already aware of the backlash (which I am not)... The piece on him by Wired is the only evidence presented - https://archive.ph/fybMC#selection-2331.7-2331.112
In truth, Zitron’s two jobs aren’t in as much tension as they might seem to be. The PR wheedling and the critical needling come from the same place: He loves this stuff. He’s just mad it doesn’t work better. “I'm actually kind of a lover,” he said. “I love my friends, and I really love the computer.” The problem is that “they’re fucking it up. They're fucking up the computer. They're making it worse. AI does not do what they say it will. The Metaverse didn't. Crypto doesn't. Just these lies. And then the products we use every day get so much worse.”
That’s the thing. LLMs are indeed an interesting technology and are quite useful in some circumstances. It’s this breathless insistence that it will change literally everything in the world, and the charlatans making fortunes off this hype, is the real problem. There’s no hypocrisy in this.
What kind of contract do you suppose a company signs with a PR firm when they do business? Do you suppose it stipulates the tone the employees of the firm can take when discussing the client company? Do you suppose it restricts the topics they can discuss or disclose information about? I cannot think of a way that he could avoid a lawsuit if he directly shit talked a former client with insider knowledge of their plans and products.
It's valid for him to come under scrutiny for running a PR firm as well as being a talking head, but this angle seems fucking goofy.
One might expect him to not take on AI boosting clients at all, then NDAs and disparagement clauses don't apply.
I agree, seems stupid! I'm still having a hard time accepting this as a scandal next to embedded ads for Wired's own content literally calling AI salvation though:
Compared to, "EZPR has four clients, none of which, Zitron claims, is in the business of generative AI." They even diffuse their own point near the end, "In truth, Zitron’s two jobs aren’t in as much tension as they might seem to be. The PR wheedling and the critical needling come from the same place: He loves this stuff. He’s just mad it doesn’t work better"
And MOTHER FUCKER, now when I'm looking into one of those clients it turns out they were represented by Zitron and company when they were pre-LLM form fillers per another EZPR employee: https://knowtechie.com/donotpay-has-a-new-gpt-powered-chatbot-for-bill-negotiation/ . So Zitron worked with them Sept2020-Oct2021, and the article shows LLM incorporation happening a year later?
In OP's link Baldur makes the point that you can't do PR and news reporting without creating a conflict of interest because "You have two readers: the archetype that represents your likely audience and a tech oligarch’s opposition research team." but then just repeats Wired's message? HoW cOmPrOmIsEd‽¿?
Sorry, I got irritated that my time was being wasted the more I dug into this but it's not at you.