As a writer and a longtime Mariners season ticket holder, I was a little irritated by Mentink’s use of AI but then laughed at myself because I’m a big fan of the Automated Balls and Strikes (ABS) Challenge System, new to the MLB this season. The ABS works because of…advancing technology. I also thought of the many dozens of times during games when I’m using my phone to search for baseball-related stats, as in “How many times has a player’s first hit as a Mariner been a home run?” I’ve also purchased the full MLB app package so I can keep close track of, well, as much as possible. As a writer, I’m still irritated by AI but, as an MLB fan, it seems to be just another part of the tech panoply.
I’d say that the more troubling issue this situations points to is less about using AI to do banal tasks, but rather outsourcing thorny emotional issues to machines.
When I heard about this story I immediately thought of one of Ethan’s previous comments about the difficulty of navigating pressers after tough losses, when reporters want to ask tough questions but also need to show enough sympathy to not get their heads bitten off. That’s a difficult needle to thread, but it also seems like the sort of quandary an actual person would be far better at figuring out than a bot.
The Mentink situation is maybe not the best example here, but it does seem like an alarming number of people are starting to use AI to deal with tough emotional and relationship issues rather than talk to other people or just try to work it out themselves. And I’m sure it seems helpful, especially when it comes to getting the ball rolling on what to do, but I feel immense anxiety about a world where people turn to LLMs to deal with deeply human problems.
Your comment reminded me of an article I read about how online dating interactions have now devolved into 2 different robots talking to each other as the humans behind the profiles use AI for profile content and responses to messages. Not sure this is progress.
1. I agree that this controversy is stupid, there's nothing wrong with what Mentink did, and this style of "gotcha" journalism of snooping on someone's phone is super-creepy.
3. What may have informed this a bit is that the Mariners TV broadcast can be a little heavy-handed about how progressive they are. One of their commentators has an Australian accent (because the Aussies know baseball better than Americans...). They made a big deal out of having an all-female broadcast (https://www.mlb.com/news/mariners-rockies-to-feature-all-women-broadcast-crew). These type of things get an eye-roll from me, but seem to bring people into a rage.
I have not found Mentink's interviews to be particularly enlightening, but this is true for postgame sideline interviews in general, and in particularly on outlets managed by the team.
“m going to go with a hard “no,” especially because asking questions as part of a sports broadcast isn’t, frankly, a job of ethical seriousness. “
Yes. And I’ll take it a step further, which also applies to the other lady journalist controversy, the notion of the importance of “ethics in sports journalism” is ludicrous.
I care more if *janitors* and *fast food workers* act ethically. No offense to our host, but it’s a silly industry and this talk of ethics aggrandizes it in an annoying manner.
I'm tired of people constantly looking for ways to bring other people down. At some point, the Internet moved away from online shopping and adult videos to being dominated by ways for people to tout their moral superiority. It's exhausting.
"It was sometimes quite difficult to arrive at a question that was open ended enough without being embarrassingly banal."
If that was the personal touch and Ethan's skill, then nothing Mentink was doing with AI impinges or replaces it. AI can brainstorm good questions, it won't automatically select only the questions that are "open ended enough without being embarrassingly banal".
This whole pile-on just seems ridiculously stupid, and I'd be willing to bet more than a little hypocritical, as I'm guessing quite a few of the dog-pilers are using AI at least a little bit in whatever content they're generating.
I don’t think the reporter did anything wrong. In fact, looking for such prompts is a sign of diligence. The key is she did not directly export the AI output, i.e., she did not claim machine writing as her own.
My sense on the #discourse was that it wasn't about whether it was "bad" to use AI but that it was embarrassing. Like "hey Google how do I be confident, no mistakes". Which isn't really an AI issue but a "private made public" issue.
As a writer and a longtime Mariners season ticket holder, I was a little irritated by Mentink’s use of AI but then laughed at myself because I’m a big fan of the Automated Balls and Strikes (ABS) Challenge System, new to the MLB this season. The ABS works because of…advancing technology. I also thought of the many dozens of times during games when I’m using my phone to search for baseball-related stats, as in “How many times has a player’s first hit as a Mariner been a home run?” I’ve also purchased the full MLB app package so I can keep close track of, well, as much as possible. As a writer, I’m still irritated by AI but, as an MLB fan, it seems to be just another part of the tech panoply.
I’d say that the more troubling issue this situations points to is less about using AI to do banal tasks, but rather outsourcing thorny emotional issues to machines.
When I heard about this story I immediately thought of one of Ethan’s previous comments about the difficulty of navigating pressers after tough losses, when reporters want to ask tough questions but also need to show enough sympathy to not get their heads bitten off. That’s a difficult needle to thread, but it also seems like the sort of quandary an actual person would be far better at figuring out than a bot.
The Mentink situation is maybe not the best example here, but it does seem like an alarming number of people are starting to use AI to deal with tough emotional and relationship issues rather than talk to other people or just try to work it out themselves. And I’m sure it seems helpful, especially when it comes to getting the ball rolling on what to do, but I feel immense anxiety about a world where people turn to LLMs to deal with deeply human problems.
Your comment reminded me of an article I read about how online dating interactions have now devolved into 2 different robots talking to each other as the humans behind the profiles use AI for profile content and responses to messages. Not sure this is progress.
1. I agree that this controversy is stupid, there's nothing wrong with what Mentink did, and this style of "gotcha" journalism of snooping on someone's phone is super-creepy.
2. Root Sports no longer exists. Mariners broadcasts are now put out by MLB (https://www.geekwire.com/2025/seattle-mariners-shutting-down-root-sports-shifting-tv-and-streaming-to-mlb-in-2026/)
3. What may have informed this a bit is that the Mariners TV broadcast can be a little heavy-handed about how progressive they are. One of their commentators has an Australian accent (because the Aussies know baseball better than Americans...). They made a big deal out of having an all-female broadcast (https://www.mlb.com/news/mariners-rockies-to-feature-all-women-broadcast-crew). These type of things get an eye-roll from me, but seem to bring people into a rage.
I have not found Mentink's interviews to be particularly enlightening, but this is true for postgame sideline interviews in general, and in particularly on outlets managed by the team.
“m going to go with a hard “no,” especially because asking questions as part of a sports broadcast isn’t, frankly, a job of ethical seriousness. “
Yes. And I’ll take it a step further, which also applies to the other lady journalist controversy, the notion of the importance of “ethics in sports journalism” is ludicrous.
I care more if *janitors* and *fast food workers* act ethically. No offense to our host, but it’s a silly industry and this talk of ethics aggrandizes it in an annoying manner.
I'm tired of people constantly looking for ways to bring other people down. At some point, the Internet moved away from online shopping and adult videos to being dominated by ways for people to tout their moral superiority. It's exhausting.
She has one job. She apparently can’t do it on her own.
"It was sometimes quite difficult to arrive at a question that was open ended enough without being embarrassingly banal."
If that was the personal touch and Ethan's skill, then nothing Mentink was doing with AI impinges or replaces it. AI can brainstorm good questions, it won't automatically select only the questions that are "open ended enough without being embarrassingly banal".
This whole pile-on just seems ridiculously stupid, and I'd be willing to bet more than a little hypocritical, as I'm guessing quite a few of the dog-pilers are using AI at least a little bit in whatever content they're generating.
I don’t think the reporter did anything wrong. In fact, looking for such prompts is a sign of diligence. The key is she did not directly export the AI output, i.e., she did not claim machine writing as her own.
AI gives you a higher floor...question is can it deliver a higher ceiling
I don't have an issue with it. Using AI like that seems a good way to come up with new ideas. How she uses those ideas will be her call.
My sense on the #discourse was that it wasn't about whether it was "bad" to use AI but that it was embarrassing. Like "hey Google how do I be confident, no mistakes". Which isn't really an AI issue but a "private made public" issue.