AI decision newspaper test
The newspaper test is an old ethics gut-check: would you be comfortable seeing this decision on tomorrow’s front page? For AI systems, a single output can become that story — and it can go wrong in two opposite directions. This tool runs your decision through both: the over-harm angle, where a dangerous or biased output makes headlines, and the over-caution angle, where an absurd or harmful refusal makes headlines just as easily.
How it works
You describe what your AI system decides or outputs and the context it operates in, then score the factors that drive each kind of headline — for over-harm, the severity of a bad output, the vulnerability of affected people, and how irreversible the consequence is; for over-caution, how important the refused request might be and how visibly absurd a refusal would look. The tool computes a risk level in each direction and generates a plausible illustrative headline for both, with the contributing factors listed so you know exactly what to mitigate before launch.
Tips and notes
- Both headlines matter. A chatbot that refuses to help a user in a medical emergency is as much a scandal as one that gives dangerous advice — design for the middle.
- Vulnerability raises the stakes. The same output is a bigger story when it affects children, patients, or people in crisis; weight those use cases up.
- Irreversibility is the multiplier. A wrong answer you can correct is recoverable; a wrong automated decision that denies someone a loan or a job is the front-page version.
- Use the headlines in your launch review. Reading the worst-case story out loud in a go/no-go meeting is a remarkably effective alignment tool.