‘It’s a wild west,’ says tech journalist on the rise of AI Chatbots

CNN - May 6th, 2025

In a recent discussion on the rollout of Google's AI chatbot 'Gemini' for children under 13, Bianna Golodryga spoke with Laurie Segall, tech journalist and CEO of Mostly Human Media. The conversation highlighted the growing trend of AI companions, raising questions about the implications of integrating such technology into the lives of young users. Google's move to introduce Gemini to a younger audience marks a significant shift in how technology companies are targeting the next generation, potentially reshaping the landscape of childhood interaction with digital tools.

The decision to introduce AI companions to children opens up a complex web of considerations surrounding privacy, ethical use, and developmental impacts. With AI playing an increasingly integral role in daily life, the introduction of Gemini raises important discussions about safeguarding young minds and ensuring responsible use of technology. This development underscores the need for policymakers, educators, and parents to engage in meaningful dialogue about the role of AI in education and socialization, as well as the responsibilities of tech companies in protecting young users.

Google Gemini Bianna Golodryga Ai Chatbot Laurie Segall Mostly Human Media Ai Companions Children And Technology

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.0

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The story provides a timely and relevant overview of Google's rollout of the AI chatbot 'Gemini' for children under 13, touching on important public interest issues such as technology's impact on education and privacy. While the main claims are mostly accurate, the story could improve in balance by including more diverse perspectives, particularly those of parents and educators. The source quality and transparency are limited, with a reliance on a single expert and a lack of disclosed methodologies or potential conflicts of interest. The clarity and readability are strong, but the story could benefit from more context and background information to help readers fully understand the implications of the AI rollout. Overall, the story is a good starting point for discussion but could be enhanced with more comprehensive reporting and a wider range of perspectives.

Accuracy

The story accurately reports on the rollout of Google's AI Chatbot 'Gemini' to children under 13 years old, as confirmed by several sources. It mentions the rise of AI companions, which aligns with broader industry trends, though not specifically tied to Gemini's child-focused version. The claim about AI companions is not directly verified in the context of this rollout. The discussion between Bianna Golodryga and Laurie Segall is not directly verifiable without the transcript, but the main points reflect known developments. Overall, the story is mostly accurate, but some claims about AI companions need further verification.

Balance

The story presents a balanced view by discussing both the rollout of the AI chatbot and the broader implications of AI companions. However, it could benefit from including more perspectives, particularly those of parents, educators, and child psychologists, to provide a fuller picture of the potential benefits and risks associated with introducing AI technology to young children. The discussion seems to lean towards the technological and business aspects, potentially underrepresenting social and ethical concerns.

Clarity

The story is generally clear and concise, presenting its main points in a straightforward manner. However, the lack of detailed context and background information might make it difficult for readers unfamiliar with the topic to fully understand the implications of the AI chatbot rollout. Including more detailed explanations and definitions could improve clarity for a broader audience.

Source quality

The story cites a tech journalist and CEO of 'Mostly Human Media,' Laurie Segall, which adds some credibility due to her expertise in technology journalism. However, the absence of additional sources or direct quotes from Google or child advocacy groups limits the depth of source quality. More diverse and authoritative sources, such as academic experts or official statements from Google, would enhance the reliability of the information presented.

Transparency

The story lacks transparency in terms of disclosing the sources of its claims and the methods used to gather information. There is no mention of the methodology behind the claims or any potential conflicts of interest that might affect the reporting. The story could improve transparency by clearly stating where the information comes from and any limitations or biases that might influence the narrative.