Chadds Ford Live has an AI slop problem

Update: Since publishing this piece, Chadds Ford Live connected with the CFTRA and replaced the AI-modified photo with the real one. They also updated the caption to be accurate. I appreciate these updates, and also hope that the outlet’s photojournalism integrity doesn’t have to be enforced by the public going forward.

Original Article:

Did you know that, according to Chadds Ford Live, Jen Fournier was named 2026 Player of the Year by CFRTS in Chadds Ford? Haven’t met our Chadds Ford neighbor, Jen Fournier? Me neither. That’s because she doesn’t exist. Neither does the CFRTS, and the 2026 version of the actual award won’t be presented until early 2027. In short, it’s all a bunch of AI slop.

I thought this would be the weirdest article I’d ever write. Turns out it’s the most sort of funny, sort of sad, kind of pathetic, and incredibly concerning “is this where the world is headed?” article I’ve written to date.

This is how I feel about it: 🤨🙄😮😕😲😭🤬🤢🥺🫣

You may have heard that I won the 2025 Citizen of the Year award in Chadds Ford, an award presented each year by the Chadds Ford Township Residents Association. I’m not one to gloat about myself, so I was hesitant to share (even though I absolutely want to write about whoever wins every other year).

Chadds Ford Live AI modifications botch the story

But according to Chadds Ford Live, the story mentioned Jen/Jean Panaro/Panero/Panera as the winner, while the (clearly AI-modified) image and related caption showed Jen Fournier as the Player of the Year from the CFRTS. 🧐 Squint at the first photo, and you can see it.

Player of the Year?! I was an athlete growing up, but these days that’s probably not what I’d be celebrated for. Those glory days are decades behind me. 

The image and caption get more than just all the basic facts wrong. If you’ve met me in person (or seen the real photo), you’ll notice I look nothing like the woman in the featured photo.

Moreover, AI gave me an extra chin (thanks, bro 😏) and made sure I was looking directly at the camera (unlike in the real photo). It also altered (though less egregiously) the faces of Susan and Jody (not “Jodie,” in case you’re confused by the photo caption that misspells his name).

Here’s the original photo compared to the AI-modified image.

I make light of the absurd AI blunder, but it’s also very sad. Many people in our community rely on Chadds Ford Live for hyperlocal news. For years, it’s provided that.

Since being purchased by a new owner, the site has seen changes. It’s mobile-friendly now and much faster, which should be upgrades. But it also appears to be relying more heavily on AI, and this is an example of how that can degrade our community news sources.

It doesn’t have to be this way. Some of the AI photos Chadds Ford Live uses could be replaced with real photos from other sites, with credit. In this case, the CFTRA provided the real photo to Chadds Ford Live, and they chose not to use it. WTF?! 🤯

Imagery is a very important part of journalism. Editor Rich Schwartzman is an award-winning photographer. The publication has access to proper photojournalism tools and skills. Why aren’t they using them?!

Sometimes, stock images are appropriate, or a story doesn’t need a real photo to convey the relevant story. When stock images are purchased or generated with AI, this could easily be disclosed in the caption.

The imagery around this specific article is an example of lazy journalism, letting AI take shortcuts without human intervention to ensure accuracy or reliability.

Doubling down on the AI double chin

Upon seeing the AI images and incorrect information, a representative from CFTRA and I reached out separately to Chadds Ford Live to request that they update the article for accuracy and inquire about the AI image. They never responded to me, but ultimately connected with a CFTRA representative when they crossed paths in person.

But ya know what they did?

1. They removed the original, accurate image that had been included later in the article.
2. Not only did they continue to use the AI slop photo, but they also re-ran it through AI to update the wording on the certificate, knowing the images of the real humans were incorrect. 👀

💭 So now we’ve apparently bypassed unintentional errors and scooted right along to intentional lack of integrity? Got it.

Do you think I should take it personally? Do they want to make sure no one knows it’s me? Are they afraid I’m competition? (More on that below.) Or are they just that uninterested in accurate media?

I’ve got receipts. 🧾 (Everyone loves the Snipping Tool, am I right?) ✂️

Original headline image and caption (March 31/April 1)

The first version of the AI-modified headline image appeared on the article. You can see the original caption included under the AI-generated photo misspells Jody’s name, states that I’m the 2026 recipient (I’m not), and uses the wrong acronym for CFTRA. As I mentioned above, the language on the certificate is all wrong.

Second image and caption in the original article (March 31/April 1)

The screenshot below shows the correct photo, which was originally included midway through the article. My name is misspelled in the caption (Jean instead of Jen), and the second sentence calls me “Ashe” (no idea where that came from – maybe it should say ‘she’?). It’s still called the CFRTS, not the CFTRA, but the photo is legit. And in this photo, I’m the 2025 recipient (which is correct).

Images after the requested update (April 6 and April 7)

Upon learning about the AI blunder, Chadds Ford Live made some updates. Great, right? Nope.

As of April 6, 2026, they removed the real photo. Instead of updating the caption on the AI-generated headline photo, they just deleted it. Cool. 👍🏻

But even worse, they re-ran the photo through AI to change the certificate, so now it says Jen Panera (like the bread company, still not me) won Citizen of the Year (got that right), and they kept using the image that looks nothing like the real people.

Then, on April 7, they added a new caption… and it’s still wrong!

Why would they do this? I can only speculate. But it’s a bummer to watch our longstanding local media outlet succumb to AI slop and deliberately choose it over accuracy.

AI is tempting for local media

AI slop might be the future of media, and especially local media. Local media is extremely difficult to execute responsibly and profitably simultaneously. We know this from decades of shifts in the media landscape and the closures of local media outlets.

From experience, I can attest to this. I run Connect Chadds Ford on my own, and friends… it is not keeping its own lights on. A few kind souls pay for subscriptions out of the kindness of their hearts, but I intentionally don’t put anything behind a paywall because I think the information is important for our community. I want people to have access to it regardless of their ability to pay.

I may eventually run programmatic ads to cover some of the cost of hosting and email service (forget paying myself or anyone else for time and effort).

This is not a sustainable business plan, of course. This means I don’t qualify for the growing number of grants available to for-profit local media outlets. Grant funders want to jumpstart sustainable growth, not fund local media in perpetuity, which I fully respect and understand.

Lately, it looks like Chadds Ford Live is prioritizing profits over reliability and accuracy, at least in some contexts. The written content about Chadds Ford (mostly from Rich Schwartzman) continues to maintain its general integrity. But the imagery and captions surrounding the text sometimes seem compromised, and when they’re sometimes wrong, how will we know when they’re right?

More local media is better (when it’s accurate)

This is a huge bummer. I want to see Chadds Ford Live thrive. Good and trustworthy local media is so important. It’s how we build connections, hold our elected and appointed officials accountable, support local business growth, and understand what’s going on right where we can take action to make our world a better place. It gives us agency and access.

For those skeptical of my critique, rest assured that I don’t see Chadds Ford Live as a zero-sum game competitor. We do different types of stories and reporting, and I love having Rich’s quick reporting from public meetings as a resource. There are more than enough public meetings, hot topics, and incredible residents and local businesses to feature to support the success of multiple media outlets. Sometimes it’s nice to hear about the same issue from different perspectives. We all come to the story with our own angles and notions.

My goals for Connect Chadds Ford are transparency, accountability, connection, and delight. There’s more than enough space for thriving, responsible versions of Connect Chadds Ford and Chadds Ford Live. (If I really cared about competition, I’d probably also care more about profitability and put my best work behind paywalls.)

Is this the new media normal?

As I did a double-take on the Chadds Ford Live image, I immediately thought it felt like The Onion or Babylon Bee, both satirical news outlets that write fake stories based on real news. When outlets like The Onion and Babylon Bee are becoming harder to decipher from genuine media channels, we know we’ve got trouble.

The world is changing. AI infiltrating almost every aspect of our lives feels inevitable. Hopefully, Chadds Ford Live can hold its content to a higher standard.

But let this be a reminder to bring skeptical eyes to your news feed and start to hone skills to identify AI.  It’s only going to get harder, and what is life in a post-truth world?