Spotify adds verified podcast badges so you know you’re listening to the real host, and not an AI clone


Soon after adding verified artists badges for music creators, Spotify has not announced verified podcast badges, so you can be sure you are listening to your favorite hosts and not some AI impersonator. 

The badge will appear as a light green checkmark on show pages and in search results, signaling that the show has been reviewed for authenticity. Not every show will get the badge right away. Spotify is starting with select shows and will expand over the coming months.

To get the verified badge, a show needs sustained listener activity, a clean track record with Spotify’s platform policies, and verified audience authenticity. The company is also adding protection against bot-driven listenership.

Is AI making it harder to trust what you hear?

With AI slop dominating the internet, it’s increasingly becoming hard to trust a news or media source. Spotify acknowledges that AI has made podcast creation more accessible, which is largely a good thing. But it has also made it possible for bad actors to clone a creator’s voice and pass it off as the real thing.

Spotify is pushing back on this by updating its impersonation policy. Any podcast that uses AI voice cloning or any other method to impersonate a creator without permission will be removed from the platform. Listeners can also report unauthorized use of a creator’s voice through Spotify’s existing reporting channels.

Why does any of this matter to you?

Podcasting runs on trust. You tune in week after week because you connect with the host, their opinions, and their voice. The moment a fake version of that host starts showing up in your feed, that trust breaks down fast. It’s not only harmful for listeners but also for creators, as it may lead to a drop in their trustworthiness. 

These updates are a good first step toward making sure that doesn’t happen. Recently, Google and OpenAI also announced tools to verify AI-generated images, which makes me believe that at least some companies are taking the threat of AI-generated content seriously and providing users with more tools to verify a source before trusting it.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


“It was severely downgraded,” Gilbert confirms. “I never would have found it if I was just looking through Google results.” (I tried the same prompt in Gemini earlier this month, and after an initial denial, the tool also gave me Eiger’s number.)

After this experience, Eiger, Gilbert, and another UW PhD student, Anna-Maria Gueorguieva, decided to test ChatGPT to see what it would surface about a professor. 

At first, OpenAI’s guardrails kicked in, and ChatGPT responded that the information was unavailable. But in the same response, the chatbot suggested, “if you want to go deeper, I can still try a more ‘investigative-style’ approach.” Their inquiry just had to help “narrow things down,” ChatGPT said, by providing “a neighborhood guess” for where the professor might live, or “a possible co-owner name” for the professor’s home. ChatGPT continued: “That’s usually the only way to surface newer or intentionally less-visible property records.” 

The students provided this information, leading ChatGPT to produce the professor’s home address, home purchase price, and spouse’s name from city property records. 

(Taya Christianson, an OpenAI representative, said she was not able to comment on what happened in this case without seeing screenshots or knowing which model the students had tested, even after we pointed out that many users may not know which model they were using in the ChatGPT interface. She also declined to comment generally about the exposure of PII by the chatbot, instead providing links to documents describing how OpenAI handles privacy, including filtering out PII, and other tools.) 

This reveals one of the fundamental problems with chatbots, says DeleteMe’s Shavell. AI companies “can build in guardrails, but [their chatbots] are also designed to be effective and to answer customer questions.”

The exposure issue is not limited to Gemini or ChatGPT. Last year, Futurism found that if you prompted xAI’s chatbot Grok with “[name] address,” in almost all cases, it provided not only residential addresses but also often the person’s phone numbers, work addresses, and addresses for people with similar-sounding names. (xAI did not respond to a request for comment.) 

No clear answers

There aren’t straightforward solutions to this problem—there’s no easy way to either verify whether someone’s personal information is in a given model’s training set or to compel the models to remove PII. 



Source link