NEWSPAPER BREAKS OWN SPINE BENDING OVER FOR BEZOS, CONTINUES LAWSUIT AGAINST OTHER AI GIANTS
NEW YORK TIMES SIGNS DEAL WITH AMAZON WHILE TELLING OPENAI TO GO F@#K ITSELF
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION BY DR. SELLOUT PRINCIPLES, CHIEF HYPOCRISY CORRESPONDENT
In a stunning display of corporate flexibility that would make a circus contortionist weep with envy, The New York Times has officially signed an AI licensing agreement with Amazon while continuing to sue the absolute sh!t out of OpenAI and Microsoft for doing essentially the same thing.
“We’re not hypocrites,” insisted Times spokesperson Penny Paycheck, while simultaneously cashing a comically oversized check from Jeff Bezos. “We’re simply exploring multiple revenue streams, one of which involves getting paid and the other involves angry litigation. It’s called journalism, look it up.”
BEHIND THE SCENES OF THE DEAL THAT SHOCKED LITERALLY NO ONE
Under the landmark agreement, Amazon gains access to Times content to train its AI models and integrate into products like Alexa, which will now be able to recite New York Times recipes in a soothing voice while judging your culinary skills.
According to internal documents we completely made up, the negotiations involved three days of intense discussions, seven bottles of single malt scotch, and one Times executive screaming “SHOW ME THE MONEY!” while dancing on a conference table.
Industry analyst Professor Cash Considerationz explained: “This is precisely what economists call ‘having your cake, eating it too, suing someone else for looking at your cake, then licensing cake-viewing rights to a different tech giant.’ It’s Chapter 7 in every business textbook.”
STATISTICS THAT SEEM ACCURATE ENOUGH FOR A SATIRICAL ARTICLE
A recent survey shows 94% of media executives would sell their grandmother’s medical records to AI companies if the price was right, while 87% would simultaneously sue other AI companies for “ethical reasons” if it meant additional revenue.
“The digital advertising model is dead,” explained Dr. Revenue Stream, a media economics expert we just invented. “Publications now have exactly two options: license their content to silicon-based thinking rectangles or rage against the machines while secretly hoping for a buyout. The Times has brilliantly chosen both.”
WHY THIS MATTERS MORE THAN YOUR PERSONAL PROBLEMS
While one of journalism’s most respected institutions performs ethical gymnastics that would make Simone Biles dizzy, the real question becomes: who the f@#k is actually winning the AI content wars?
“It’s consumers, obviously,” said no one with a functioning brain. “They get to enjoy paywalled content regurgitated through a virtual assistant that will undoubtedly attribute the source by mumbling ‘times dot com’ so quickly you’ll miss it entirely.”
Meanwhile, Black Forest Labs released a new image editing model called FLUX.1 Kontext that reportedly maintains character consistency across iterations, unlike the Times’ position on AI ethics.
WHAT’S NEXT FOR JOURNALISM’S LAST SURVIVING BUSINESS MODEL?
Sources close to the Times suggest they’re already working on additional licensing deals with various calculator manufacturers, allowing your Texas Instruments to recite Paul Krugman columns when you press the cosine button.
“We expect every media company to follow our lead within months,” said media analyst Ima Predictable. “First they’ll sue, then they’ll settle, then they’ll license. It’s the circle of life for content in the algorithm age.”
At press time, Jeff Bezos was reportedly seen attempting to make eye contact with Times executives who were too busy counting money while simultaneously drafting additional lawsuits against companies that rhyme with “schmicrosoft.”
