The headline is real, but it describes a November 2, 2023 Futurism investigation—not a new 2026 finding. The underlying concern remains relevant to anyone who uses MSN, Microsoft Start, Edge, or search-driven news feeds for financial information: a platform can place low-quality material beside reputable reporting, making weak or AI-generated claims look more trustworthy than they are.
The more accurate description is not that Microsoft writes every MSN article with AI. MSN is primarily a distribution platform carrying material from thousands of external publishers, creators, and advertisers. The problem is the layered system: outside publishers create content, feeds submit it, automated systems ingest and rank it, and limited review may fail to catch misleading or nonsensical material before readers see it.
What the 2023 headline got right
Futurism documented several embarrassing examples on Microsoft’s MSN news platform. They did not all have the same origin, which matters when assessing the claim.
- MSN distributed a syndicated article whose headline described deceased former NBA player Brandon Hunter as “useless.”
- Microsoft published and later removed an Ottawa travel guide that advised visitors to go to a food bank “on an empty stomach.” Microsoft said it was investigating how the article passed its review process.
- An AI-generated poll appeared next to a Guardian article about a woman found dead in Australia.
- MSN had also distributed sensational material from outside publishers concerning mermaids, Bigfoot, UFOs, angels, and other paranormal subjects.
Some examples involved third-party articles. Others involved text or features generated by Microsoft or its systems. Treating all of them as proof that Microsoft authored every item would overstate the evidence. But the examples did show a real editorial-quality problem: automated distribution allowed content that should have been rejected, corrected, or clearly labeled to reach a large audience.
Recommended Free Tools
#1 Best Overall
MSN is not one conventional newsroom
Microsoft describes MSN as a platform that brings together content from thousands of external publishers, creators, and advertisers. Microsoft Start, introduced in 2021, similarly uses aggregation, personalization, artificial intelligence, machine learning, and human moderation to select and distribute content. MSN continued to operate after Microsoft Start launched.
That structure creates an important distinction:
| What happened | What it does not necessarily prove |
|---|---|
| An article appeared on MSN | That Microsoft wrote the article |
| Microsoft removed an article after complaints | That every other article was checked by a human before publication |
| A headline or poll was AI-generated | That the full accompanying article was generated by the same system |
| A publisher used AI to produce content | That Microsoft knew about the use before distribution |
The strongest supported criticism is that Microsoft operated a broad, partly automated publishing and recommendation ecosystem in which poor material could be accepted and gain credibility from appearing alongside established publishers.
What happened to Microsoft’s human curators
In May and June 2020, Microsoft announced layoffs affecting journalists, editors, and other workers involved in selecting, editing, and curating material for MSN, Microsoft News, and Edge. Reporting at the time said automated systems would take over much of that work. The UK team included approximately 27 workers, with additional cuts reported in the United States.
Those employees were generally not an investigative newsroom producing original reporting. Their responsibilities included choosing stories from other publishers and editing headlines, images, and presentation for Microsoft’s news surfaces.
That distinction corrects another frequently repeated version of the story: Microsoft did not fire an entire reporting staff and replace it with ChatGPT. The major curation changes occurred in 2020. ChatGPT was not publicly released until November 2022. The company was replacing or reducing editorial production and selection work with automated systems before the current generative-AI boom.
Why this matters for personal finance readers
A nonsensical travel recommendation is embarrassing. A nonsensical money article can be expensive.
Low-quality financial content can encourage readers to:
- buy or sell an investment based on an invented catalyst;
- misunderstand tax deadlines, deductions, or eligibility rules;
- apply for a loan without comparing the annual percentage rate and fees;
- send money to a scammer promoted through a fake celebrity or “breaking news” story;
- cancel insurance, pensions, or debt payments after reading unsupported advice;
- mistake a sponsored product recommendation for independent reporting.
Distribution next to a recognizable publication can create borrowed credibility. Readers may assume that every headline in the same feed has passed the same editorial process. It has not necessarily done so. A platform recommendation is not a fact-check, and an attractive headline is not evidence that the publisher understands the subject.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Microsoft’s current AI policy is stricter on paper
Microsoft’s current MSN AI-content policy distinguishes between unreviewed AI-generated content and AI-assisted content.
Unreviewed AI-generated content means output produced by an AI system without downstream human review or intervention. Microsoft says this type of content is prohibited on MSN, subject to limited exceptions. Partners must contractually promise not to submit it.
AI-assisted content may use AI for drafting, research, headlines, or revisions, but a person must review, materially direct, or intervene in the work. Microsoft’s policy specifically treats the following as AI-assisted:
- an AI-generated or AI-modified headline;
- AI-generated research used by a human writer;
- a human-written article revised by AI;
- other material created with AI but reviewed and directed by a person.
The policy prohibits more than obvious chatbot spam. It also bars using AI to rephrase published material and republish it under a different byline or brand, producing thin high-volume rewrites of real news, creating misleading partisan or divisive variants, impersonating authors, or deceiving readers about a story’s provenance.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Rank #3
AI disclosure is recommended—not yet mandatory
Microsoft recommends disclosures such as “This content was created with the help of AI” and human-accountability bylines such as “Jane Doe (AI-assisted)” or “By Jane Doe (with AI)”.
However, the current policy page says this disclosure is not currently required. Microsoft says it intends to require partners to tag AI-assisted content and will provide advance notice. That leaves a meaningful gap between the policy’s definition of AI involvement and what a reader can necessarily see on the page today.
For a money article, the absence of an AI label should not be interpreted as proof that no AI was used. Conversely, an AI-assisted label does not automatically make an article useless. The practical questions are whether a qualified person checked the claims, whether primary sources are linked, and whether the writer takes responsibility for the advice.
Automation and human review still operate together
Microsoft’s publishing guidelines for MSN partners say the service uses both automated systems and humans to review content. Its auto-publishing feature can ingest and publish partner material automatically when it complies with the rules.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Microsoft can disable auto-publishing for serious or repeated violations, incomplete feeds, technical problems, or other issues. It also says suspected unreviewed AI-generated content may be reviewed, demoted, or removed, and that partners can be suspended or terminated.
Those are enforcement options, not proof that every article receives meaningful human review before it appears. The likely system is closer to automated intake followed by a mixture of automated checks, human review, ranking decisions, complaints, and post-publication enforcement.
Rules do not guarantee good financial journalism
MSN’s current partner requirements include several safeguards:
| Requirement | Why it matters to readers |
|---|---|
| No scraped aggregation without full written permission | Reduces copied material and unclear ownership |
| At least 10 articles per day for news sites, including live or breaking coverage | Sets a publishing-volume threshold, although volume is not the same as quality |
| Basic grammar, spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure standards | Helps identify careless or machine-produced material |
| Ownership and contact information | Gives readers somewhere to investigate the publisher |
| Full-name bylines and no fake author profiles | Makes accountability easier to assess |
| Clear, verifiable attribution | Lets readers trace claims to an original source |
Microsoft separately says brands are assessed on original writing and reporting, editorial oversight, content-type labels, attribution, and compliance with publishing rules. These standards are useful, but a rulebook cannot eliminate every bad headline or fraudulent claim from a high-volume platform.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →How to check an MSN money article before acting on it
- Identify the publisher. Look beyond the MSN interface. Open the article and find the site that actually produced it.
- Check the byline and date. Be cautious of “Admin,” generic names, missing authors, undated updates, or an old article presented as current.
- Find the primary source. For tax matters, look for the relevant tax authority. For investments, inspect the company filing, exchange announcement, or regulator notice. For rates, compare the lender’s disclosure with independent sources.
- Check the numbers. Verify interest rates, fees, repayment periods, tax thresholds, inflation figures, and dates. A single misplaced decimal can change the conclusion.
- Search the headline in quotation marks. If numerous sites carry identical wording, the story may be syndicated or rewritten. That is not automatically wrong, but it makes source-checking more important.
- Look for commercial incentives. Affiliate links, lead forms, sponsored labels, and urgent calls to invest or apply can reveal that the page is designed to sell rather than inform.
- Do not make an irreversible decision from one feed item. Confirm financial, tax, legal, and investment claims using an official source or a qualified professional.
Microsoft’s 2026 publisher strategy is different from MSN aggregation
In February 2026, Microsoft announced a Publisher Content Marketplace for licensing premium publisher content to AI builders. Microsoft says participation is voluntary, publishers retain ownership and editorial independence, and publishers define licensing and usage terms. The initial use cases involved grounding Microsoft Copilot responses with licensed content, with Yahoo identified as an early demand partner.
This is separate from ordinary MSN aggregation. It does not prove that the older quality problems have been solved. It does show a newer public strategy focused on licensed, higher-quality publisher material for AI systems while MSN remains a broad partner-distribution platform.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.The accurate verdict
The 2023 Futurism article identified a genuine problem, but its headline is too broad if read as a precise description of Microsoft’s entire news operation.
It is inaccurate to say that Microsoft writes all MSN articles with AI, that every bad story is Microsoft-generated, or that Microsoft replaced reporters with ChatGPT. It is also inaccurate to say MSN has no human review. The documented facts support a narrower and more defensible conclusion: Microsoft used extensive automation and a large external-publisher ecosystem, and that system allowed low-quality, misleading, partner-supplied, and sometimes Microsoft-generated material to reach readers before it was removed or corrected.
Best Value
- Natural skin tones, radiant look: Logitech’s TrueSoft technology delivers balanced, full-spectrum LED light with cinematic color accuracy and optimal lighting for video conferencing or Zoom meetings
- Wide, flattering light: Litra Glow's frameless diffuser radiates wide, soft light that flatters the subject and eliminates harsh shadows in any setting, providing flawless webcam lighting
- Safe for all-day streaming: Whether gaming, podcasting or broadcasting, Litra Glow adjustable LED light has cleared even the strictest UL testing guidelines for all-day streaming*
- Freedom of light placement: Patent-pending, 3-way monitor mount with adjustable height, tilt, and rotation for precise light positioning on your desktop computer or laptop
- Fine-tune your on-camera look: Adjustable brightness and color temperature settings help you quickly achieve the video look you want, from warm candlelight to cool blue
For personal-finance readers, the practical lesson is simple: treat MSN as a distribution channel, not as a guarantee of editorial reliability. Trace important claims to their source before moving money, signing a loan, changing a tax position, or buying an investment.
FAQ
Did Microsoft generate every bad article that appeared on MSN?
No. MSN carries material from thousands of external publishers, creators, and advertisers. Some documented failures involved partner-supplied or syndicated content, while others involved Microsoft-generated text, headlines, or polls.
Did Microsoft replace journalists with ChatGPT?
No. Microsoft reduced staff involved in MSN, Microsoft News, and Edge content curation in 2020, before ChatGPT was publicly released in November 2022. Those workers generally selected and edited external material rather than producing an investigative newsroom’s original reporting.
Does Microsoft currently ban AI-generated content on MSN?
Microsoft’s current policy prohibits unreviewed AI-generated content and requires partners to promise not to submit it. AI-assisted material is allowed when people review or materially direct it, although Microsoft says AI disclosure is recommended and not currently mandatory.
Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteWindows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallCan I trust a personal-finance article because it appears on MSN?
No. MSN distribution is not a guarantee that every claim has been independently checked. Identify the original publisher, inspect the byline and date, verify numbers against official or primary sources, and seek qualified advice before making a significant financial decision.
The Bottom Line
Bottom line: The 2023 headline was based on real MSN failures, but it should not be recast as proof that Microsoft wrote every “garbage” article with AI. MSN is a partly automated distribution platform combining outside publishers, algorithms, and human enforcement. For money decisions, verify the original source and the numbers—never confuse placement in an MSN feed with financial due diligence.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
