Dozens of mainstream news articles uncritically accepted that explanation at face value, parroting [company] line that they are an AI-powered fintech powerhouse whose innovative AI prowess had rendered its American workforce obsolete.

My investigation uncovers a far more conventional explanation: [company] is shifting work once performed by American employees to lower-cost operations in India, the Philippines, and Colombia.

The word for this is “AI washing.” Much like “greenwashing,” AI washing allows companies to wrap conventional corporate behavior in the language of technological progress. Instead of admitting that jobs are being eliminated because the work can be performed more cheaply overseas, executives describe the cuts as an unavoidable consequence of artificial intelligence.

For a company preparing to go public, the AI narrative is far more attractive. “We outsourced thousands of jobs to India” sounds like conventional cost-cutting. “We used artificial intelligence to transform our workforce” sounds like innovation, and encourages investors in the IPO to value the company as a fintech platform rather than merely another vanilla insurance broker.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5877957&forum_id=2\u0026show=week#49966695)

Related—have you considered that your style of journalism might be well suited to a Muddy Waters, Hindenburg, Hunterbrook style monetization?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5877957&forum_id=2\u0026show=week#49966868)