Editor’s Note: Retraction of article containing fabricated quotations

February 16, 2026
Editor’s Note: Retraction of article containing fabricated quotations

Here's something that might surprise you — Ars Technica had to retract an article because it included fake quotes generated by AI. Yep, an AI tool basically made up what someone supposedly said, and that got published. Ken Fisher, writing for Technology, explains that this is a big no-no, especially since Ars has long warned about relying too much on AI. Now, here's where it gets interesting — Ars says this was a one-off mistake, and they've checked their recent work and found no other issues. But what’s crucial, according to Fisher, is that Ars has a strict rule: any AI-generated content must be clearly labeled and used only for demo purposes. And in this case, that rule was broken. So, the lesson here? Even the most tech-savvy outlets can slip up — what really matters is how they handle it afterward. Keep an eye on how AI is integrated into journalism. The risks are real — and the standards matter more than ever.

On Friday afternoon, Ars Technica published an article containing fabricated quotations generated by an AI tool and attributed to a source who did not say them. That is a serious failure of our standards. Direct quotations must always reflect what a source actually said.

That this happened at Ars is especially distressing. We have covered the risks of overreliance on AI tools for years, and our written policy reflects those concerns. In this case, fabricated quotations were published in a manner inconsistent with that policy. We have reviewed recent work and have not identified additional issues. At this time, this appears to be an isolated incident.

Ars Technica does not permit the publication of AI-generated material unless it is clearly labeled and presented for demonstration purposes. That rule is not optional, and it was not followed here.

Read full article

Comments

Audio Transcript

On Friday afternoon, Ars Technica published an article containing fabricated quotations generated by an AI tool and attributed to a source who did not say them. That is a serious failure of our standards. Direct quotations must always reflect what a source actually said.

That this happened at Ars is especially distressing. We have covered the risks of overreliance on AI tools for years, and our written policy reflects those concerns. In this case, fabricated quotations were published in a manner inconsistent with that policy. We have reviewed recent work and have not identified additional issues. At this time, this appears to be an isolated incident.

Ars Technica does not permit the publication of AI-generated material unless it is clearly labeled and presented for demonstration purposes. That rule is not optional, and it was not followed here.

Read full article

Comments

0:00/0:00
Editor’s Note: Retraction of article containing fabricated quotations | Speasy