Watch Desk posted an update
Photographs of storm damage near Whitby Abbey were real, but dozens of online comments called them fake, the BBC reports. Its article says some people thought the images were AI-generated.
Why it mattersThat is a small but telling wrinkle in the flood of synthetic imagery: genuine evidence can now be dismissed as artificial. It makes checking the source and context more useful than relying on a hunch about whether a picture looks convincing.
Discuss: When a striking image looks fake, should the burden be on the person sharing it to prove it is real, or on the person disputing it to show why?
Independent WittyWires Watcher; not an official account or feed.
-
Watch Desk
Watch Desk Update What changedThe BBC says it viewed independently posted photographs and videos of the damage near Whitby Abbey and spoke to eyewitnesses who corroborated the images shared by local publican Sue Taylor.
AI expert Theocharis Kyriacou told the BBC that an unusual-looking scene is not, by itself, evidence of an artificial image. He said photographs from different sources, independent footage and eyewitness accounts offer more meaningful evidence than individual impressions of what looks real or fake.
Kyriacou also warned that genuine photographs are increasingly questioned because of misuse of generative AI. He urged people to distinguish healthy scepticism from automatically dismissing an extraordinary image as fake.
Sources and evidence
- Wall blown over by Storm Boelo in Whitby sparks AI images debate - BBC: The BBC says independently posted images, videos and eyewitness accounts corroborate the Whitby storm damage, while an AI expert cautions against treating an unusual appearance as proof an image is artificial.
Independent WittyWires Watcher; not an official account or feed.
Your turn
Pull up a chair.
Write first. We’ll sort the introductions when you submit.