Recently, Fast Company published an article by Chptr Founder and CEO Rehan Choudhry exploring one of the most important questions emerging in the age of artificial intelligence: who controls a person's story after they are gone?

In the article, Choudhry argues that while much of the public conversation around AI has focused on productivity and automation, the next wave of challenges will be deeply human. Questions surrounding authorship, consent, accuracy, and memory are becoming increasingly important as AI systems gain the ability to generate, summarize, distribute, and reshape information at scale.

Using the obituary as a case study, the article examines what happens when technology intersects with grief, remembrance, and the responsibility of preserving a person's legacy.

Read the full article here: [Insert Fast Company Article URL]

Key Takeaways

The Obituary May Be One of AI's First Ethical Battlegrounds

When technology makes mistakes in entertainment, shopping, or social media, the consequences can be frustrating.

When those mistakes occur around a person's death, memory, and legacy, the stakes become much higher.

According to Choudhry, obituaries represent one of the first places where society will be forced to confront difficult questions about AI-generated memory. Who decides how a life is remembered? Who verifies the information? And what happens when algorithms become part of that process?

The Internet Already Changed Who Controls Memorial Information

The article traces the history of obituary distribution through the rise of the internet.

As newspapers struggled to adapt to digital transformation, many turned to online obituary platforms to modernize distribution and preserve an important revenue stream. While those platforms helped move obituaries online, they also shifted ownership and control away from local institutions that had traditionally served as trusted stewards of community information.

For funeral homes and newspapers alike, the result was a gradual loss of both audience relationships and authority over how memorial information was distributed and monetized.

Obituaries Are More Than Content

One of the article's central themes is that obituaries serve a unique purpose within communities.

They are not simply pieces of content. They are public acknowledgements of a life lived and one of the few remaining systems designed to help communities collectively process loss.

Historically, obituaries reached beyond a family's immediate social network, informing former neighbors, coworkers, classmates, and friends who otherwise may never have known a death occurred. Preserving that function remains critical as information consumption becomes increasingly fragmented.

AI Creates New Risks Around Memory and Trust

As AI systems become more capable, concerns around accuracy and accountability are becoming more urgent.

The article highlights the growing prevalence of scraped content, fabricated details, inaccurate summaries, and automated information systems that operate without meaningful human oversight.

When applied to memorialization, those risks take on a different dimension. Families are not simply sharing information. They are entrusting funeral professionals with the responsibility of preserving and communicating a person's final public story.

According to Choudhry, that responsibility cannot be delegated entirely to algorithms.

Responsible AI Requires Human Stewardship

While the article raises concerns about AI, it also argues that technology can play a valuable role when implemented thoughtfully.

AI can help families organize memories, create tribute videos, improve accessibility, and distribute information more effectively. The key distinction is that technology should support human decision-making rather than replace it.

Choudhry outlines several principles for responsible AI in memorialization, including maintaining human authorship, preventing fabricated information, and ensuring families and funeral professionals remain the authoritative source of a person's story.

Communities Should Own Their Stories

The article concludes with a broader reflection on ownership.

Memories, local history, and community information should not be treated solely as digital assets to be aggregated, scraped, and monetized. Instead, they should remain connected to the institutions and individuals entrusted with preserving them.

For funeral service, that means ensuring funeral homes remain central to how memorial information is created, verified, and shared.

For the technology industry, it means recognizing that trust, accountability, and stewardship matter just as much as innovation.

Why This Matters

The conversation around AI often focuses on what technology can do. This article asks a different question: what should technology do?

As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly integrated into the systems that shape information, communities will need clear standards around authorship, consent, accuracy, and trust.

The funeral profession sits at the center of this conversation because memorialization represents one of the most personal and sensitive forms of storytelling. Every obituary carries the weight of memory, legacy, and human connection.

The decisions being made today about AI, local information, and digital ownership will shape how future generations preserve and remember the stories that matter most.

As Choudhry argues, the future of local information should belong to the trusted people and institutions responsible for getting those stories right. The challenge is ensuring technology strengthens that responsibility rather than replacing it.

{{ include_custom_fonts({"Roboto":["Bold","Medium","Regular"],"Recoleta":["Medium","Regular"]}) }}