Use of AI by IPSO complainants

IPSO Complaints Process 

The IPSO complaints process is designed to be clear and accessible. You can submit a complaint anywhere and anytime using our online complaints form: https://www.ipso.co.uk/making-a-complaint/.  

We take complaints from all and any members of the public, and there is no need for a lawyer or other representative. 

It’s not necessary to present your complaint in full sentences or paragraphs – bullet points are perfectly acceptable. If you encounter any difficulty or challenges in corresponding in English, we can arrange translation services to support you. 

To help us understand your complaint, the key is to clearly explain what you believe is wrong with the article or the journalist’s conduct. You do not need to be familiar with the Editors’ Code of Practice to make a complaint – we can assist in identifying the relevant clause or clauses for you. 

The role of AI in the complaints process 

It may be tempting to use AI to help draft your complaint. 

AI can aid on some occasions. This can have clear benefits when done selectively.  For example, it can be extremely useful for: 

• Spell checkers, grammar checkers or other writing assistance; 

• Auto transcription; and 

• Translation. 

However, we have identified several potential risks associated with its use, which may hinder proper consideration of your complaint:   

• Hallucination – this describes the generation of factually inaccurate or misleading responses by AI systems. AI usually generates output in a confident and assertive tone, making it difficult for users to detect any possible inaccuracies within its response.  In the context of IPSO complaints, we have noticed instances where complaints that appear to have been generated using AI have referred to Clauses which do not exist in the Editors’ Code of Practice, or inaccurately stated that IPSO has powers or responsibilities which it does not possess. Unfortunately this can lead to confusion and misunderstandings. 
• Repetition – AI can generate repetitive content, which is known as the “repeat curse” among some scholars. Repeated content may undermine our ability to fully understand your complaint and can obscure a complainant’s key points. This may result in prolonged exchanges before we understand concerns. This causes delay in the complaints-handling process. We usually find simple and concise correspondence to be the most effective. 
•   Omission – Another risk of using AI to write a complaint is that your main concerns may be inadvertently removed during its editing process. Since AI typically generates a complete email or essay-type response, you may find yourself less inclined to proofread or check its contents. As a result, we will not be able to understand fully the essence of your complaint. 

 Regardless of how you use AI, the golden rule is to remain actively engaged in the process:  

• Provide clear and specific prompts to the AI systems;  

• Review the AI output to make sure you fully understand and agree with it; and  

• Verify all the information before finalising it. 

We recognise that making a complaint may be an unfamiliar process, but we are here to help. You can call us on 0300 123 22 20 during IPSO’s working hours for guidance and support.