Harvard Professor Accused of Using AI for Op-Ed Opposing Trump’s Tariffs

Ricardo Hausman, a Harvard professor and former Venezuelan government minister, has faced strong criticism after being accused of using artificial intelligence to prepare an op-ed published in the Financial Times opposing Donald Trump’s tariffs, the New York Post reported.

After the article was published on Thursday, the newspaper added an explanatory note at the top. It said the Financial Times had been informed that AI had been used to summarize a longer draft before the material was sent to the newspaper and underwent its editorial procedures.

The note also reiterated that the Financial Times’ ethical guidelines do not allow the use of artificial intelligence during the writing process.

The debate quickly spread across social media, where numerous users questioned the style of the op-ed and described it as stiff, poor-quality writing typical of AI-generated content.

“This is the worst use of artificial intelligence I have seen in a major publication,” one user wrote on X.

Another user shared the results of an analysis conducted by the AI-detection tool Pangram. According to the assessment, 71% of the 841-word article appeared to have been generated by artificial intelligence.

The case has also sparked discussion in academic circles, as universities and lecturers try to find ways to respond to students’ increasing use of AI tools to write papers.

Michael Sokolow, a professor at the University of Maine, said the incident makes it more difficult for lecturers to encourage students to write with “conviction, creativity, personality and style.”

Even people who had previously praised Hausmann’s work expressed surprise at what happened.

Joe Wiesenthal of Bloomberg said he had learned a great deal from Hausman and had enjoyed his conversations with him. He described the case as “truly astonishing,” both in terms of how the piece was written and the fact that it was published.

Hausman, 70, who served as a minister in the Venezuelan government, had not responded to requests for comment by the time the article was published.