Sign InPremium
People who come to us have jobs and families to support, as well as expenses to pay. Life is already difficult enough. Consider going into it on an empty stomach.
In August 2023, a Microsoft Travel guide listed the Ottawa Food Bank among “can’t miss” attractions and added a striking line: “People who come to us have jobs and families to support, as well as expenses to pay. Life is already difficult enough. Consider going into it on an empty stomach.”
We checked the highlighted excerpt with the isFake.ai AI Text Detector. The tool indicated that 77% of the content was likely AI-generated, showing familiar patterns: generic phrasing, neutral tone, and templated cadence. The case sparked debate on algorithmic content curation and the need for human editing. Coverage and a statement from the Ottawa Food Bank are available at The Verge.
Why it matters: AI-assisted copy in news-like contexts can drift into tone-deaf or decontextualized language. When posts go viral, that mismatch damages trust. Before you share, verify with detectors, check original sources, and look for editorial oversight.
Q: Was this confirmed by reputable sources?
A: Yes. The incident and response were reported by multiple outlets, including The Verge, which quoted the Ottawa Food Bank’s communications manager.
Q: Did isFake.ai flag the whole article?
A: Here we analyzed the specific excerpt shown above. The detector estimated 77% likelihood of AI-generation for that excerpt, not the entire article.
Q: Does a high AI score prove it’s machine-written?
A: No tool provides absolute proof. A high score indicates strong AI-like signals and should prompt editorial review and sourcing checks.
Q: What are typical AI text signals here?
A: Repetitive syntax, emotionally flat wording, and generic, template-like phrasing that lacks precise human context.
Q: What should editors do?
A: Keep human review in the loop, cite sources clearly, and run sensitive copy through AI detection plus a style and context check before publishing.
