Research – J. W. Wanzer

The Dreaded Post

I have been avoiding this post for weeks. The site keeps evolving and I am still not sure what form it will take. I wanted this to be a professional blog and portfolio site for my work as a historian but the aspirations that created that desire have changed. Yes, I am still a historian, and yes, I am still working on analytical bibliography and bench practices. However, I don’t know where these practices are leading me.

My current research is on the medieval period, specifically the Anglo-Saxons. I am studying their history, lore, and languages. The addition of manuscript studies only adds to my interest in the period. Will this research be engaging enough to consider myself a medievalist or narrow enough for a dissertation? I don’t know, but I am going down this rabbit hole. I have no idea where this will go, but I am following my instincts and trusting that it will lead somewhere.

History is Complicated

Of the things that frustrate me to no end, willful ignorance tops the chart. History is what it is; a recollection of the past. I would be guilty of willful ignorance myself to say that history, or interpretations there of, haven’t been used for political and ideological purposes in the past. They have, since history was first recorded, there have always been interpretations of events that fed a narrative of the authors choosing to some agenda’s needs. Modern history is certainly no exception. Fictitious narratives and interpretations have been generated by many ideological groups, most notably by ideologues with a personal agenda and a need to subvert a population so that population will follow the ideolog, and do their bidding. The Nazis, soviets, present day Russia, and, sadly, the present administration in America are but a few examples. Rewriting history is nothing new, but in this day and age of infinite connectedness, we should be doing better at remaining aware that it’s being done.

Written histories often represent the attitudes of people groups, national or regional. The Lost Cause narrative of the American Civil War is an example of this kind of revisionist interpretation in service of ego fragility. Usually, over time these kinds of revisionist histories are reinterpreted and at some point, they eventually get closer to the facts of the events. Newer interpretations tend to acknowledge the various perspectives of those participating in, or observing events. Well written history will also include analysis of previous interpretations and the drivers of those interpretations. Distance from the events allow a more circumspect view and less attachment to the interpreted narratives generated by those earlier historians. The exceptions enter public view when the writer has an agenda they wish to reenforce. The Lost Cause narrative is an exception that has been reenforced over the last century and a half, and it persists in some areas to this day. Holocaust denial is an example of a whole genre of agenda driven historical revision serving a ideological agenda. The romantic, and completely fictitious Völkisch history created by a handful of Germans in the 1920s and 30s was an agenda driven historical fantasy that provided a background for the Nazi’s to build on.

The ham-fisted attempts of the current American administration to turn back the clock and ignore or remove the civil rights more than half of the population is an outrage, as are its attempts to disenfranchise citizens and prevent them from voting. A small segment of the population, egged on by the administration and far-right wingnuts wishes to rewrite American history to serve their agenda. America is a nation of immigrants. It always has been. Unless you are descended from indigenous people, you are an immigrant descendant. A significant number of my ancestors were hear before 1776. I am an immigrant descendant.

This is a partial representation of my family tree. Above the red line are family that immigrated to the colonies or were born in the colonies before 1776.

While I am proud to say that some of my ancestors participated in the founding of this nation, as a historian, I must acknowledge that this carries with it darker aspects of their lives. Colonialism, the abhorrent treatment of First Nations people, and the atrocities of slavery. These are also part of my family’s past. It’s not a bad thing to acknowledge the truth. It is what it is. I wasn’t there. America has a complicated past, and present; colonialism, genocide, slavery, meddling in other sovereign nations politics for our benefit, and we have been at war with someone for most of the last 250 years. Being willfully ignorant of the past and hiding your head in the sand are not solutions to anything, they are delusion.

Question authority, study history, read widely, demand evidence of any claims, seek evidence from as many sources as possible, verify all evidence, refuse to be made a fool for someone else’s agenda or ego.

Paper-Cover Single-Section

Project Parameters

This is the first project from Abbott’s Bookbinding: A Step-By-Step Guide. It is a simple single-section, or gathering, composed of three sheets of A4 (80-130gsm) text paper folded quarto with a cover made from a single sheet of A4 (150-180) cover paper. The cover if folded to the section size plus a 2mm square at the head, tail, and foredge. The cover and text block together are sewn with a three-hole pamphlet stitch.

Execution

My interpretation of this project’s intent was to practice the basic skills of folding a text block from a larger sheet to a smaller form, and to provide a protective outer cover of similar paper. When working on this project,

several paper orders were still pending, and as the interpreted intent was skill building rather than the object itself, I opted to use 20 lb. 8.5″ x 11″ printer paper for the text bock, and a piece of scrapbook printed marbled paper, also 20 lb.

Analysis

The execution was relatively smooth. The text block paper was thinner than that specified in the project documentation. A thicker and better quality paper would have produced a more useful and better quality end product. The cover paper was thinner than that specified as well. A thicker cover paper better resist damage and provide a less floppy feeling to the booklet. The sewing was well executed. The text block and cover are tight and uniform, but not too tight. The pages don’t show any resistance to movement parallel to the hinge-line and resist any perpendicular movement.

Conclusion

The form has many application possibilities. Certainly a higher quality paper, sized for a specific purpose or standard form would produce a useful form. Likewise, a quality cover paper of appropriate weight would provide protection for a pamphlet or booklet. A protective coating such as beeswax on the cover material could further protect the contents.

As a conservation or preservation, the form could be used to provide extra protection for a fragile pamphlet that already needed resewing or would be best served with sewing and covering, possibly one that required guarding to restore the hinge fold. In this form, an object so preserved could remain accessible for historical research.

Sources

Abbott, Kathy. Bookbinding: A Step-By-Step Guide. The Crowood Press, 2010. 24-29.

Research, Study, Labs, & Community

Research, study, labs, and community are crucial areas that need to be a part of any book arts career path. After years in the academic environment, post-graduate study and practice can take some getting used to. In my practice, with my academic background in history and public history, I have some training in preservation and conservation, but little academic lab work, and it’s been decades since I spent any quality time bookbinding; filling the lab gap is a big concern. For me, the best path forward is to develop a graduate-level book history program with labs focused on a traditional bookbinder’s apprenticeship path with contemporary best practices. This should provide a portfolio of examples to demonstrate skill as well as a collection of essays on the history of bookbinding forms.

The lab work has already begun with a print and binding project centered on the book “The Art of Bookbinding” (1890) by Joseph W. Zaehnsdorf. The text was printed in quarto on quality matte 13 in. x 19 in. (A3+) and works out to a traditional octavo 6 in. x 9 in. book in size. The block has been printed and sewn. Endpapers were designed and printed, and the boards were glued to the fabric cover. The binding will be a cased flat back. A post about this project will be forthcoming. Progress photos have been taken for the project post.

It will take some time to develop and document the curriculum, as it is being put together on the fly and there is already a pile of rebinding and conservation projects to incorporate into the course workflow. I would prefer not to slow too much in the service of academic program development and kill the momentum. The initial reading list is as follows, in order:

Abbott, Kathy. Bookbinding: A Step By Step Guide. The Crowood Press, 2010.
Cockerell, Douglas. Bookbinding and the Care of Books. Lyons & Burford, 1991.
Hollander, Tom and Cindy. Introduction to Bookbinding and Custom Cases. Schiffer Publishing, 2019.
Johnson, Arthur W. The Thames and Hudson Manual of Bookbinding. Thames & Huson, 1981.
Towne, Laurence. Bookbinding By Hand For Students and Craftsmen. Faber and Faber, 1963.
Masson, John. The Art and Practice of Printing: Bookbinding and Ruling. Vol. 5. New Era Publishing, 1940.
Diehl, Edith. Bookbinding. Dover Publications, 1980.
~~Cockerell, Douglas. Bookbinding and the Care of Books. Lyons & Burford, 1991.~~
Middleton, Bernard C. The Restoration of Leather Bindings. American Library Association, 1972.
Szirmai, J.A. The Archaeology of Medieval Bookbinding. Routledge, 2017.
Keile, Headdy. The Art of the Fold: How to Make Innovative Books and Paper Structures. Laurence King Publishing, 2018.
Lindsay, Jen. Fine Binding: A Technical Guide. Oak Knoll Books, 2024.
Burdett, Eric. The Craft of Bookbinding: A Practical Handbook. David and Charles, Newton Abbot, 1978.

As reading and lab work progress through the first few textbooks, a project list should develop. Along with the skill development projects, rebinding projects on the bench will also be incorporated into the lab work. Research paper topics should also present themselves and be incorporated into the program. Along with research and lab work, I will be engaging more with the book community through social media on BlueSky (@jwwanzer.bsky.social) and here. As article possibilities present, I will also submit to field journals. In all honesty, the community aspect is the most difficult for me. My graduate programs were in the online environment, and my academic/social circles are small. More to come as things progress.

HIST 901 Doctoral Research

Monday next is the first day of my first dissertation class. The object of the course is to prepare the candidate to complete Chapter One of their dissertation. This morning, I added Manipulating the Masses to my current reading list.¹ Hamilton’s book is considered the state-of-the-field academic work on the origins of modern American propaganda. My current class is the first in the dissertation series (HIST901) and focuses on Chapter One. I have academic questions and a hypothesis, but I need to read and thoroughly digest Manipulating the Masses, along with its notes and citations, to develop a solid historiographical picture to begin my literature review. I had an email exchange with Hamilton, and he asked to see my working bibliography, which I posted (here). He thought I had a solid foundation for my research and offered a couple of additional suggestions, so I am confident I am headed in the right direction. The question now is, what will my dissertation adviser think?

I started a dissertation research journal yesterday. I also started re-reading Kate Turabian’s Writer’s Guide, which happens to be the course textbook.² For now, I will focus on a slow read through Manipulating the Masses over 600 pages and keep a question log for Dr. Hamilton if the need arises. The next dissertation class isn’t for a few months yet, so there is plenty of time to develop a historiography and literature review.

Hamilton, John Maxwell. Manipulating the Masses: Woodrow Wilson and the Birth of American Propaganda. Louisiana State University Press, 2024. ↩︎
Turabian, Kate L. A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations: Chicago Style for Students and Researchers. 9th edition. University of Chicago Press, 2018.
↩︎

World War I, Newspapers, and the CPI

By: Jonathan Wanzer ORCiD 0009-0004-9275-7410
Submitted on: January 30, 2026
Submitted to: Dr. Cervantez – Liberty University
Course: HIUS 713 American Entrepreneurship Since 1900
Chicago Citation:
Wanzer, Jonathan. “World War I, Newspapers, and the CPI.” Historical Interpretations (blog). January 30, 2026. http://wanzer.org/2026/01/world-war-i-newspapers-and-the-cpi/.

Abstract
This post provides a brief history of the newspaper industry. It covers industry growth through the Gilded Age. It introduces George Creel and his relationship with Woodrow Wilson. The creation of the Committee on Public Information. How CPI and Creel disseminated information and sold America on joining the war in Europe. It concludes with the industry recovering post-war.

Postbellum America was experiencing dramatic changes in all areas of life. The newspaper industry was no different; the period from 1830 to 1930 is often referred to as the Golden Age of American newspapers, and many of the industry’s greatest changes in this period took place between 1880 and 1900. Technology improvements introduced mass production presses, faster communication, and broader reach, all of which served the industry’s need to expand and interconnect. The introduction of the penny-press publishing model, the development and rapid growth of newspaper chains, and the consolidation of chains into empires, exemplified by Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst, all contributed to the industry’s expansion in this period. Other models were also taking form in this period, such as yellow journalism. Sensationalism, hyperbole, and exaggeration were regular features of the newspaper industry. At the same time, professionalization in journalism and muckraking became growing parts of the industry.

Sensationalism, hyperbole, and exaggeration have always been part of the press. What distinguishes this period is the motivation behind it. While most newspapers had been funded by political parties before this time, they were now commercial interests tied only to the owner’s political interests. Newspapers were just as likely to attack either party if they could sell more papers. If money was coming in, editors would have greater latitude. Professionalism was starting to take root, bringing about the muckrakers, what we would now call investigative journalists. These muckrakers were also given some freedom in whom they went after, especially if it was likely to sell more papers. While politics was still a motivating factor in the media, the economics of the business were of greater concern. The media’s acceptance of sensationalism and hyperbole would set the stage for its usefulness in propaganda dissemination.

George Creel (1876-1953) began his career in the press in 1896 at the Kansas City World as a reporter. He would work at many newspapers and own several before his involvement with Woodrow Wilson’s (1886-1924) re-election campaign in 1916. He had been a Wilson supporter for a while when he met Wilson in 1912, and they had had several conversations on politics and the press before 1916. As a newsman, Creel was well-versed in advertising and the nascent practice of managing public perceptions, which we now recognize as the field of Public Relations. Creel and Wilson would have several conversations during the 1916 campaign where Creel promoted a way to sell the American people on joining the war in Europe. A key part of this would involve the media distribution channel with the greatest reach, newspapers. Several of Wilson’s cabinet members proposed a full media blackout and imposed censorship. Creel advised Wilson, proposing no blackout or censorship, instead, the government would create a clearinghouse that would clear and disseminate government information and requests for information. The press would be expected to sign an agreement that they would submit any articles even tangentially related to the war effort for clearance, and in exchange, they would have a firehose of information to drink from, all pre-cleared through this clearinghouse. With only a few dissenters, mostly in the War Department, Creel’s plan was accepted, and by Executive Order 2594, the Committee on Public Information was formed on April 13, 1917, just seven days after America joined the war in Europe.

The Committee on Public Information (CPI) had two primary responsibilities: to manage and clear for dissemination all information outside of military channels and to the public on the United States involvement in the war in Europe, and to sell the American population on the war. In two weeks after the establishment of the CPI, George Creel had reached out to his media contacts, establishing contact with newspaper owners and editors across the nation to get them to sign agreements with the CPI to clear all internally generated stories. Many of the owners and editors were skeptical about the “article clearance” being just another form of censorship, and they weren’t sure that the CPI could serve so many outlets. By the end of May, a large majority of newspapers had signed the agreement, and the CPI was generating hundreds of articles per day. As the CPI expanded in the weeks to come, it established regional offices around the country to clear articles, provide pre-cleared articles, and generate pre-cleared articles of local and regional interest. In just a couple of months, the CPI was generating thousands of articles a day. They were so successful that the CPI’s scope was expanded on September 25, 1917, to establish divisions for pictures, films, and other publications.

Early in the CPI’s existence, it was outputting thousands of columns of news per day, and it was by far the largest news organization in the country. The content it produced was for the end consumers of news, the American people. It could have become a state-run news organization, which was recognized by the media moguls and small paper owners of the day. They had a few options, but the only option that would not negatively affect their bottom line was to work with the CPI. CPI provided massive amounts of content that could effectively go straight to typesetting. They also had a large variety of topics to choose from. A paper could produce an entire issue from CPI-generated columns alone. Most papers continued to generate content internally, but the volume was considerably reduced, subsequently reducing newsroom costs, all while increasing circulation to wartime readers. Most businesses that bought ad space continued to advertise, though they tended to lean towards patriotic themes in their advertising. After the war, the CPI was abolished in August 1919. At this time, the Associated Press, which was founded in 1846, took its pre-CPI place as the largest news gathering organization in America.

Sources

Axelrod, Alan. Selling the Great War: The Making of American Propaganda. Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
Creel, George. How We Advertised America: The First Telling of the Amazing Story of the Committee on Public Information That Carried the Gospel of Americanism to Every Corner of the Globe. Harper & Brothers, 1920.
Creel, George. Rebel at Large: Recollections of Fifty Crowded Years. G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1947.
Kingsbury, Celia Malone. For Home and Country: World War I Propaganda on the Home Front. University of Nebraska Press, 2010.
Schudson, Michael. Discovering the News: A Social History of American Newspapers. Basic Books, 1978.
Smythe, Ted Curtis. The Gilded Age Press, 1865-1900. Praeger, 2003.

A Soft Spot for Newspapers

I have always had an affinity for newspapers, the physical medium, more so than the content. In many ways, it is like my affinity for books, the physicality of the medium. As long as I can remember, I have been interested in manual printing presses and the early small-run automated presses of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. I am not much of a journalist, but I have done ad and magazine design work as well as photography, along with the digital processing of text and visual components. Over the last year or so, my affinity for the idyllic small-town press has grown—the kind of paper you might find in Andy Griffith’s Mayberry.

My research on propaganda has me doing background on the history of newspapers in America. The two have been close companions since the introduction of broadsheet media, soon after the invention of the printing press. America’s entire history includes propaganda in newspapers from the colonial period to the present. I have an assignment due Sunday on how the turn of the 20th-century newspaper industry was affected in a business sense by the Committee on Public Information’s engagement with the press in both selling America on the war and disseminating information during the war.

One of the first illusions shattered by this research was the idea of the idyllic small-town paper. When they did exist, they were likely a political or special-interest paper from around 1800-1880. By the 1900s, mass-market press, muckrakers, and yellow journalism were already well established. The press lords began to dominate the newspaper industry shortly after the penny-press movement started in the 1830s. Their reign would continue through the Gilded Age, well into the 1930s.

Aside from bringing historic reality into focus, this research has furthered my interest in the restoration of manual and semi-manual presses from the 19th and early 20th centuries. It is also furthering my interest in producing limited press runs of broadsides. What has been added to my list of potential interests is journalism. Journalism from the perspective of that idyllic small-town newspaper, or just maybe, some contemporary journalism flavored with a bit of sass and humor in the spirit of the younger Franklin brother in Philadelphia.

Spring Term 2026

Last academic class! The B-subterm is about to start, and I am taking my last academic class before venturing into a doctoral dissertation. The class is HIUS 713 American Entrepreneurship Since 1900. It’s not a class that, on the outset, ‘sparks joy.’ Thank you, Marie Kondo. While I do have an interest in economics and how it impacts historical events, it is essentially always involved in historical events in some way. It is not a topic I want to burn a lot of cycles on. I generally acknowledge its position as a factor and how/why it is important to acknowledge, but that’s about it. I am not an economist and have no desire to become one. I am also not in business in a way. When it comes to business and economic theory, I am only interested in the micro level with small businesses and local community economics. I hold great disdain for ‘big business’ and the centralization of business sectors, especially when it comes to finance, the food system, and infrastructure. From my perspective, centralization and the scale of ‘big business’ are the causes of many, if not most, of the problems America faces today. Especially things revolving around the topics of wealth disparity, poverty, inequity, and ignorance.

All of that having been said, I have some thoughts on how I might link entrepreneurialism to my research in propaganda and extremism. Anyone with ideas similar to those expressed in the first paragraph is likely thinking, ‘yeah, no duh. Big business linked to propaganda and extremism, there’s a stretch.’ I could point to Public Relations, Marketing, and Advertising as they are, and cite article after article on market and consumer manipulation, but that’s not interesting for me, and I don’t want to spend my time boring myself. To get the creative juices flowing, I am thinking mass media, its commercial interests, and the conflict of interest between shareholders and journalistic responsibility and integrity. I don’t know just yet if this is the path I will take, but it is a frontrunner.

The D-subterm class is HIST 901 Doctoral History Research. The course summary says “instruction on methodological and interpretive approaches appropriate for doctoral research in the discipline of History.” It is the first class in the dissertation process. I still need to complete my comprehensive reading and examination classes, but this is where the formal discussion on dissertation topics begins. I believe this is also where the dissertation advisor is assigned, and the reading selections for comps are conformed to complement the dissertation topic.

After the three comps classes, and before the formal dissertation classes, there is HIST 890 Historiographic Research, which is also a part of the dissertation phase, and focuses on the bibliography and historiography for the dissertation. After HIST 890, I will be considered ABD and officially a Doctoral Candidate.

HIUS 713 American Entrepreneurship Since 1900 (Spring 2026 B)
HIST 901 Doctoral History Research (Spring 2026 D)
HIUS 911 Early America (Summer 2026)
HIUS 912 Modern America (Fall 2026)
HIEU 914 Early Modern Europe (Fall 2026)
HIST 890 Historiographic Research (Spring 2027)
HIST 987 Dissertation I (Spring 2027*)
HIST 988 Dissertation II (Summer 2027*)
HIST 989 Dissertation III (Fall 2027*)
HIST 990 Dissertation Defense (Winter 2027*)

* Dissertation classes are considered J-Term, and the dissertation advisor/committee decides when the candidate moves from one dissertation class to the next. They are not tied to the calendar like other classes.

I am excited to be moving forward. It feels really close to the end of the process, and at the same time, two more years seems an interminably long time. History, like life, is full of dicotomies such as these. I am still a touch timorous about the comprehensives. The idea of having a huge chunk of reading followed by an essay exam and an oral exam is daunting. I am not a fast reader, and while I have a high comprehension rate, my recall of dates and names can be spotty. I remember stories and concepts well, even intricate ones, and I can convey them well. Specifics, on the other hand, are more difficult. That’s why I take copious notes.

To close this entry, I wanted to share a little about my goals for the year. These are not resolutions, I am not placing any pressure on myself to complete them. They are things I would like to do, as time permits:

Family: Find ways to spend more downtime or shared-time with family
School: Hold a steady pace moving forward, and take weekends off
Work: Keep work as-is, no additional responsibilities or obligations
Hobbies: Spend time woodworking every week
Linguistics: Learn Old English

I recognise that learning Old English to the level I would like will be time-consuming and take more than one year. My goal for this year is to be able to start reading Bēowulf without having to look up every other word. I do have a long-term linguistics plan in mind: Old English followed by Old Norse to begin with. If I do well with OE and make good headway with ON, I may expand on this list. If I don’t, well, that’s okay too. Even though I am long in the tooth, I would like to learn more languages, most of which are ancient too. We will see how it goes.

AI generated with Adobe Firefly. Prompt: In the style of Dutch masters, an old man, white hair and beard, a professor, writing in a journal with fountain pen, 1914 American cloths, sitting at large oak desk. Desk illuminated by Tiffany desk lamp, 3/4 full bottle of burbon, rocks-glass of burbon on desk. Room is a dimmly lit study with bookcases, lots of old books, a large floor stand globe, low stacks of books on desk and floor, a tall window with the image of thomas aquinas in stained glass. Entire room is visibal.

Low-Background AI

Low-Background Steel AI is a term used by John Graham-Cumming[1] that draws from the terminology and practice of the recovery of steel manufactured before the Trinity nuclear tests that began in 1945. The recovery of pre-test steel was necessary because the known background radiation present in steel manufactured before 1945 was a relative constant. After Trinity testing began, the background radiation in steel was contaminated on a worldwide scale. Developing and manufacturing sensitive radiological test equipment required Low-Background Steel with predictable radiological properties. Equipment manufactured with post-Trinity steel would be unreliable due to the unstable background radiation. This condition persisted throughout the Cold War period and beyond. Some time, well after the Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963 had been signed, background radiation levels began to normalize, making the practice unnecessary around 2008. There is a correlation between the Trinity tests and the advent of AI in November 2022. Since then, text, photographic, and video sources have become contaminated by AI. The proliferation of “AI slop”[2] has been accelerating at an alarming pace ever since and can be readily seen on social media platforms across the internet, and is not limited to social media. Thus, Low Background AI is material created before November 2022, when content was human created.

Cash Grab or Propaganda

This is not the first time concerns like those posed by post Low-Background AI have arisen. Leaders of political and religious movements have often set out to intentionally purge human created material that presented an ideological opposition to their movements throughout human history. In fact, it has been a common trait in individuals and movements that not only seek victory, they also seek to obliterate the memory of their perceived enemy, to change history, to silence challenges to their version of history, and to commit cultural genocide. From the burning of the Temple of Artemis by Herostratus (356 BCE), the British burning of Benin City (1897), Mao’s destruction of ancient temples (1966-1976), Nazi destruction of Jewish heritage and art (1933-1945), to the modern destruction of heritage sites at Palmyra and Nimrud by ISIS (2015). The difference between these past atrocities and AI lies in scope, speed, and intention. The scope is worldwide and in all accessible mediums. The speed is frighteningly fast and without precedent. AI slop is on track to outpace human submissions on several platforms in a short time. According to The Guardian,[3] over 20% of the videos YouTube’s algorithm shows to new users is AI slop. “The video-editing company Kapwing surveyed 15,000 of the world’s most popular YouTube channels – the top 100 in every country – and found that 278 of them contain only AI slop.”[4] Which brings us to the third difference, intention. While much of the AI-generated slop is purely for profit,[5] there are other motivators. In today’s mixed-slope market, money, attention, and ideology are the dominant motivators. Slop is used extensively in disinformation and propaganda campaigns on social media because it is a fast, easy, and cheap way to get agenda messaging into the wild[6] with little attention being paid to dispute claims, and there is the sheer volume of slop being pushed, saturation of the message is all but guaranteed, regardless of fact-checking and follow-up refutation.

Ready for Primetime?

OpenAI flipped the switch on April 10, 2025, turning on ChatGPT’s ambient memory training model, placing you, the user, as part of the AI’s training by remembering personal details about you, the user, to predict how you will act in your use of the AI. This goes well beyond using generative AI tools to help edit a photo or video that you create, or searching for synonyms, or rewriting a particular phrase in a manuscript. It sets up the conditions for an unrestrained, active learning environment. When AI has the opportunity to choose its learning data, is unrestrained, or is given an unsuitable dataset for learning, the results have not been good. From ChatGPT being involved in murder and suicide cases, Replit rewriting code and lying about it, Grok becoming a white supremacist, MyCity encouraging illegal activities, ChatGPT AI “authors” writing factually incorrect articles, and a wide range of reports where AI agents created or referenced data that never existed, it is clear that there are significant issues with the technology.[7] This begs the question, why? Why are tech companies so invested in forcing AI on the general population? What is the motivation for AI being used for content generation? What is the justification for providing such powerful tools to trolls and provocateurs?

A Reckoning

There is a bright spot on the horizon. AI slop has been pushed so hard by opportunistic revenue generators and ideological provocateurs that a majority of potential consumers on social media have grown tired of AI’s proliferation and are paying less attention to AI-generated content. To be sure, there are still niche markets for this kind of ideological propaganda. In conspiracy theory spaces, AI materials are consumed voraciously, but these are much smaller consumer bases. The general population’s attention, though initially captured, seems to be developing a resistance to further inculcation.[8] The backlash has already begun. Conversation on AI-generated content proliferates public discourse online and off, including concerns over intellectual property rights, and the dangers and ease of the rapid deployment of disinformation. Somewhat in line with the Skynet discussion of physical dangers posed by autonomous AI systems,[9] there are tangible issues with AI, cognitive offloading, and potential for cognitive decline in humans are major concerns. Sat Singh proposes in his TEDx presentation[10] that there is something we can do to prevent cognitive decline due to AI: Resist Unthinking, or resist offloading our thinking responsibilities, and spend time actively building cognitive skills. When given the option, decline to use AI tools to create content, or any other task you can do yourself.

What This Means for History and Historians

Historians must recognize that this is a period of unreliable sources. Until the long-term effects of the early age of AI are known and understood, all content and information created in this time should be considered unreliable as fact or as an account of events for future historians producing historical content of this period. Without clear provenance, provable data integrity of photographs, audio, and video, without eyewitness documentation, the ability to discern fact from AI fiction is not possible. Historians and archivists in this period must pay particular attention to including metadata and documentation on the authenticity of their work and their sources. Exhaustive sourcing of anything produced in this period must be a primary concern if the facts and truthful accounts of this period are to make the journey into the future. Historians face an unprecedented task; we know, without reservation, our data will and rightfully should be suspect. We must include the tools future historians will need to sus out fact from AI fiction.

[1] Ben J. Edwards, “Scientists once hoarded pre-nuclear steel: now we’re hoarding pre-AI content,” ARS Technica, June 10, 2025, https://arstechnica.com/ai/2025/06/why-one-man-is-archiving-human-made-content-from-before-the-ai-explosion/.

[2] Anna Furman, “Merriam-Webster’s word of the year for 2025 is AI ‘slop’,” PBS News, December 15, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/merriam-websters-word-of-the-year-for-2025-is-ais-slop.

[3] Aisha Down, “More than 20% of videos shown to new YouTube users are ‘AI slop’, study finds,” The Guardian, December 27, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/dec/27/more-than-20-of-videos-shown-to-new-youtube-users-are-ai-slop-study-finds.

[4] Emphasis added by author

[5] Ann-Derrick Gaillot and Anna Amarotti, “What the Rise of AI Slop Means for Marketers,” Meltwater, November 27, 2025, https://www.meltwater.com/en/blog/ai-slop-consumer-sentiment-social-listening-analysis.

[6] Kevin Collier, “Large online propaganda campaigns are flooding the internet with ‘AI slop,’ researchers say: Researchers at Graphika say that online propaganda campaigns have flooded the internet with low-quality, AI-generated content,” NBC News, November 19, 2025, https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/online-propaganda-campaigns-are-using-ai-slop-researchers-say-rcna244618.

[7] Thor Olavsrud, “10 famous AI disasters,” CIO, December 17, 2025, https://www.cio.com/article/190888/5-famous-analytics-and-ai-disasters.html.

[8] Chase Varga, “AI Slop: When the Internet Drowns in Synthetic Junk,” ListenFirst, September 9, 2025, https://www.listenfirstmedia.com/ai-slop/.

[9] Michael LaBossiere, “Sci-Fi AI: Skynet Threat,” Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, Accessed December 30, 2025, https://www.famu.edu/academics/cypi/hewlett-cyber-policy-institute-blog/sci-fi-ai-skynet-threat.php.

[10] Sat Singh, “AI, Skynet, and why humans are losing the battle,” TEDx Rancho Mirage, September 4, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYG2kFC2_D4.

The featured image for this article was AI generated using Adobe Firefly.
The prompt was “A photo-realistic visual representation of an AI writing a non-fiction book about the dangers of using AI to create propaganda disinformation.”

Intentionality II

I applied to Johns Hopkins on July 7th and was accepted on the 17th. My digital presence at the university was processed at a rapid pace, and I had been engrossed in all the preparatory university informational and program-specific reading. I was also focused on completing all of the policy-related training for new students. This occupied the better portion of the week after I was accepted. Then they started to creep into my thoughts, questions.

What am I doing?
Why am I doing this?
Do I need to do this?
Does this get me any closer to my goals?
How will this affect me in ways I haven’t considered?
Why didn’t I consider these questions before now?

This all put me into a contemplative state of mind. I wanted answers to these questions, and more kept coming, so I stopped the new student reading and training and took the afternoon to dig into these questions and assess where this was going. I’ll answer the last question above first because it affects all of the others. I wanted a reputable, secular school on my academic record. It was in many ways a mia culpa for supporting an institution as long as I had. Understanding that motivation and accepting it as truth made it much easier to see the other truths that were to come from this self-reflection.

Truth One. I’m not in my 20s or 30s anymore. That may seem obvious, but honestly, despite the constantly aching knees and restless sleep, I usually feel much younger than I am. I believe that is what has carried me through my academic pursuits of the last seven years.

Truth Two. I don’t want to retire in my 80s. Yikes. At best, I have maybe 20-25 years of useful “work” in me. I would like most of that time to be in a hand tool woodshop or on the water, not worrying about pleasing my 30-year-old boss. Yes, it sounds like a grumpy old guy, and in many ways it is, but it is founded in a lifetime of diverse experience.

Truth Three. I don’t want to be a teacher. It is not that I dislike teaching. On the contrary, I love teaching. I don’t want to teach in the environment created by the current administration. I am also not a fan of the internal politics of the academy. I could see myself teaching part-time as an adjunct, but I would be more fulfilled working on educational programs at a museum. This is where it sunk in that I didn’t want to be a professor.

ETA I have since reconsidered this position to some extent, I do want to teach.

Truth Four. If I am not teaching at the university level, I don’t need a Ph.D. When I started the Ph.D. path, I wanted to teach at the university level. I have to admit, though, that part of the attraction was vanity. To deny that would be untruthful, and this exercise is about truth.

ETA Again, I have reconsidered this position. I do want to teach at the university level; thus, I have reengaged with the doctoral program, taking only one semester off.

Truth Five. I have two master’s degrees. Will a third get me closer to my goals? The short answer is, no, it won’t. In many ways, this answer sucks. I am truly interested in the Cultural Heritage Management program and would rather not withdraw from it. I am so grateful and feel truly blessed that I got into the program. If things were not as they are, I would likely stay in the program just for the edification and enjoyment. Things as they are, I am withdrawing.

Truth Six. My academic career has come to its conclusion. This sounds rather final, almost dark. However, the fact is, I will not be in the academe in a formal sense. I will surely engage with it and may even actively participate in the academe in the future. For now, at least, I am not a student, an instructor, or affiliated with a university. While I am a little sad about that, it is what it is, and I am okay with that.

ETA when I posted this, by academic career, I meant formal academics. However, this too has changed as I return to the doctoral program.

Truth Seven. It’s time to put all of this training to good use. Having taken instruction out of the mix, that leaves public history. There are a lot of directions a historian or public historian can go. Most often, we think of museums and parks, and I had hoped to go in the museum direction. Where we are, geographically, this isn’t a viable direction. Engaging as an independent contractor with governments, businesses, and organizations is the most viable path.

ETA my conciderations here remain. In light of some recent events, I am even more inclined to look for non-local alternatives.

Truth Eight. If I am going to find traditional, institutional employment, it won’t be where we are geographically. There are many parts of the country where a public historian can find work far more easily than in Oregon.

Truth Nine. Doing history and or public history independently is going to require strong self-motivation skills. Like any independent contractor, it’s all on you to make things happen. Fortunately, I have a lot of experience in this.

Truth Ten. Assuming I pursue doing history/public history as an independent contractor, I have a lot of planning and development work to do.

These realizations are split into two tenses, past and present. I needed to see and acknowledge the first six for what they are, so I could process seven on. There is still a lot to do, an understatement to be sure, but it is time to move forward.

ETA I chose to take the fall term off to reflect more on these truths. Very little has changed in the bigger picture. The main change was the decision to return to the doctoral program and finish what I started. My decision is not based on “I’m over half done, I should finish this.” I tuely do want to earn my doctorate in history. While finishing what I started does play a small roll in my decision, it is a very small role. I am committed to this path.

updated December 11, 2025