On July 5, 2023, io9 published A Chronological List of Star Wars Movies & TV Shows under the “Gizmodo Bot” byline. Contemporaneous reports said the chronology contained factual and ordering errors. io9 deputy editor James Whitbrook said he received roughly ten minutes’ notice, that io9 staff did not edit or publish the piece, and that he sent G/O Media a lengthy list of corrections.
What io9 published
The article presented itself as a chronology of Star Wars films and television series. It appeared on io9 with “Gizmodo Bot” as the byline, amid G/O Media’s announced test of AI-created content across its publications. Futurism reported that the io9 publication followed that announcement by roughly a week; TheWrap also linked the company announcement in its coverage.
The available contemporaneous reporting does not identify the AI model, prompt, human-production workflow, or a complete revision history. Those details should not be inferred from the byline alone.
What was wrong with the chronology?
A reported timeline error
TheWrap cited one specific problem: the article placed the animated series The Clone Wars after The Rise of Skywalker. The series’ story occurs much earlier in the Star Wars timeline, so that placement contradicted the chronology the article was supposed to provide.
#1 Best Overall
The reports described broader inaccuracies
TheWrap said the piece contained factual errors, while The Desk described it as incorrectly ordering films and series and containing other inaccuracies. Those reports did not publish a definitive, independently verified list of every error. The Clone Wars example is therefore evidence of a reported mistake, not a complete accounting of the article’s problems.
Did io9 staff know before publication?
Whitbrook said: “I was informed approximately 10 minutes beforehand, and no one at io9 played a part in its editing or publication.” The statement, quoted by TheWrap on July 5, describes his personal notice and his assertion that io9 staff were not involved in editing or publishing the article. It is not evidence that every employee across G/O Media had the same level of notice.
Rank #2
The Desk reported that Whitbrook sent G/O Media a lengthy list of corrections after the article appeared. The material available for this account does not establish the full list, when each correction was made, or whether the original article was permanently removed.
Why Whitbrook called the article unacceptable
Whitbrook’s criticism went beyond individual Star Wars mistakes. The Desk quoted him writing:
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors“It is shoddily written, it is riddled with basic errors; in closing the comments section off, it denies our readers, the lifeblood of this network, the chance to publicly hold us accountable, and to call this work exactly what it is: embarrassing, unpublishable, disrespectful of both the audience and the people who work here, and a blow to our authority and integrity.”
Those words are Whitbrook’s assessment of the article and its publication process, not an objective quality score established by the reports. His objection to closed comments concerned accountability: readers could not publicly flag errors or challenge the publication on the page itself.
Rank #4
How the incident fits the AI-content announcement
Contemporaneous coverage placed the incident shortly after G/O Media announced a test of AI-created content across its publications. The timing led TheWrap, The Desk and Futurism to frame the io9 chronology as an example of the risks surrounding that experiment. The reporting does not, by itself, establish G/O Media’s complete company policy, the technical system used for this article, or the precise approval chain.
The editorial-control questions the episode raised
Whitbrook’s statement implicitly highlighted several points at which a newsroom could have caught or explained the problems:
Best Value
- Advance notice: he said the section’s deputy editor learned of the article only about ten minutes before publication.
- Human editing: he said no one at io9 edited or published it.
- Fact-checking: the reported chronology errors show why a list built around dates and continuity needs subject-matter review.
- Correction handling: Whitbrook said he supplied G/O Media with a lengthy corrections list, but the available reports do not document the complete outcome.
- Reader feedback: he objected that disabling comments removed a public route for readers to identify mistakes and demand accountability.
These are accountability concerns raised by this episode and Whitbrook’s remarks, not a published, comprehensive description of G/O Media’s editorial standards.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What remains unknown
- The specific AI model and prompt used to produce the chronology.
- Whether any editor outside io9 reviewed the draft before publication.
- The complete set of factual and ordering errors.
- The exact corrections made, their dates, and the article’s final status.
- Whether the chronology was part of a wider, consistently defined automated-content workflow.
The contemporaneous reports establish the publication, the reported errors, Whitbrook’s account of his notice and non-involvement, his corrections complaint, and the surrounding AI-content test. They do not resolve those technical and procedural questions.
The Bottom Line
The io9 episode was a failed Star Wars chronology published under the “Gizmodo Bot” byline during G/O Media’s reported AI-content test. Coverage identified serious ordering and factual problems, while James Whitbrook said io9 had almost no advance notice, did not edit or publish the article, and was denied a functioning public-comments route for accountability.
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.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →
