Skip to main content
NOPE
Low reported severity Media Coverage

China News Service reports a man spent over 1,000 yuan on train tickets to a Beijing photo show after asking an AI its closing date, and found it closed early

China News Service's consumer column 'Minsheng Diaochaju' reported on 17 June 2026 that a photography enthusiast working in Xi'an, who learned before the May Day holiday of a Suzhou-themed photo exhibition in Beijing, asked an AI tool when the exhibition would close and decided to visit during the holiday. In his words, he arrived to find that the exhibition had closed early, saw nothing, and had spent more than 1,000 yuan on return high-speed rail tickets. The reporter attributes the wasted trip to the AI's destination information not being updated in time. The AI's actual answer and the product are not reported.

AI system
Unidentified chatbot
Occurred
May 2026
Reported
17 June 2026
Event location
China
What the AI did
Communicated with the person
Reported harm
Financial Loss
Whose AI use
Their own AI use
Setting
Everyday life · Finance
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source
3 claims: 3 reported. 3 open questions
People reported harmed
1 person

AI system as recorded: An AI tool the man asked about the exhibition's closing date; the report does not name the product

What Happened

The report. The China News Service article, written by a Beijing reporter for the agency's 'Minsheng Diaochaju' consumer column ahead of the Dragon Boat Festival holiday, collected travellers' accounts of relying on AI for trip planning. One account is from a man working in Xi'an who is identified only by surname.

The trip. Before the May Day holiday he learned that a photo exhibition themed on Suzhou was showing in Beijing, asked an AI when it would close, and decided to use the holiday to visit. He told the reporter: 'When I arrived I found the exhibition had closed early. I saw nothing, and the return high-speed rail tickets cost more than 1,000 yuan.' He said he would check AI answers item by item in future.

Attribution and limits. The reporter introduces the account as a case in which, 'because the AI's destination information was not updated in time', the man spent 1,000 yuan for nothing. The article does not quote the AI's reply, name the tool, give the date the AI stated or say when the exhibition's closure was announced. 'Closed early' leaves open whether the organisers changed the schedule after the information the AI relied on was published.

Other accounts in the article. The same article reports another traveller told by AI that a tea park was free who then paid 136 yuan for two, and a planned route between two Beijing sights that could not be travelled in the time the AI allowed; these are separate accounts and are not part of this record.

Reported harm

By his account to China News Service, the man spent more than 1,000 yuan on return high-speed rail tickets to reach a Beijing exhibition that had already closed; the reporter attributes this to outdated AI information on the closing date.

Outcome

Unknown

Reported by China News Service on 17 June 2026 as part of a consumer feature, with an AI researcher's advice to verify AI travel plans. No refund, complaint or response from an AI provider is reported.

What remains unknown

  • Which AI tool he used and what closing date it gave.
  • When the exhibition's early closure was decided and announced, and so whether the AI's answer was already wrong when he asked.
  • The exact travel date within the May Day holiday period.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. China News Service reports that the man asked an AI tool for the exhibition's closing time and planned his holiday trip on that basis, and that he found the exhibition closed on arrival; the reporter attributes the wasted trip to the AI's destination information not being updated in time. The AI's answer is not quoted, the tool is not named, and the report says the exhibition closed early, so whether the answer was wrong when given is not established.

3 claims: 3 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported Before the May Day holiday the man asked an AI tool when a Suzhou-themed photo exhibition in Beijing would close and decided to visit during the holiday.

Causal attribution. The man's account as reported; the AI's reply is not quoted.

Reported He says that on arrival he found the exhibition had closed early, saw nothing, and had spent more than 1,000 yuan on return high-speed rail tickets.

Causal attribution. His own statement of the outcome and cost.

Reported The reporter attributes the wasted trip to the AI's destination information not being updated in time.

Causal attribution. This causal attribution is the reporter's; no AI output, date or exhibition notice is cited for it.

Sources

1 source inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Read in Chinese and translated by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-27; no human reviewer inspected the text. China News Service (state news agency) consumer feature of 17 June 2026 by a Beijing reporter, quoting the man's own words. Applies to s1.

Event countries: China. Affected-person countries: China. Court countries: Unknown.

The report places the exhibition in Beijing and says the man works in Xi'an and travelled by high-speed rail. No court is involved.

Reviewed for publication 2026-10-27: Published as an attributed traveller's account in a national news agency feature: he asked an AI tool for an exhibition's closing date, travelled on that basis and lost the cost of the trip. The reporter's attribution to outdated AI information is recorded as such, and the AI's answer remains unpublished.

People described

A photography enthusiast working in Xi'an, identified in the report only by surname.

People reported harmed in this case

1 person

1 AI participant · 0 other people harmed

One person: the man who asked the AI and made the trip. The article's other travellers are separate accounts and are not counted here.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Tags

#travel-planning#closing-date#wasted-trip#china

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). China News Service reports a man spent over 1,000 yuan on train tickets to a Beijing photo show after asking an AI its closing date, and found it closed early. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-xian-man-ai-exhibition-closing-date-answer-wasted-trip-to-beijing

BibTeX

@misc{2026_xian_man_ai_exhibition_closing_date_answer_wasted_trip_to_beijing,
  title = {China News Service reports a man spent over 1,000 yuan on train tickets to a Beijing photo show after asking an AI its closing date, and found it closed early},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-xian-man-ai-exhibition-closing-date-answer-wasted-trip-to-beijing}
}

Related cases

Medium Unidentified chatbot

Chuzhou, Anhui: a 67-year-old farmer sprayed 150 mu of sesame by drone with an AI assistant's 'weeding and pest-control plan' that named a soybean-field herbicide; the seedlings died overnight

On 10 July 2026 a 67-year-old farmer in Chuzhou, Anhui, who said he had relied on an AI assistant app for more than a year for questions such as when to spray and fertilise, asked it for a weeding and pest-control plan for his sesame field and then for a drone-spraying version. The app produced a 'full plan for 100-mu sesame aerial weeding and pest control' recommending the herbicides haloxyfop-P-methyl (高效氟吡甲禾灵) and fomesafen (氟磺胺草醚) and two insecticides. He sprayed the whole 150-mu field; the next day grass and seedlings had died together. A nearby pesticide dealer and an agronomist told Lizhi News (Jiangsu Broadcasting) that fomesafen is a broadleaf herbicide for soybean fields that must not be sprayed on sesame, and that spraying it across a whole field kills the crop; asked afterwards, the app itself said fomesafen was the cause. The chat window carried a small header line saying AI output may be wrong and should be verified, which he said he had never noticed. The app's customer service said the software has no knowledge base of its own and assembles answers from public web content, and logged the loss for follow-up; no reply or compensation was reported by publication on 1 August 2026. Relays put the loss at about 150,000 yuan; that figure is not in the text of the originating report.

Low Doubao (reported)

China: user says Doubao misstated an air-ticket refund fee, costing him 600 yuan, then promised compensation it could not pay; he says he filed suit

According to his own social-media posts and video, as reported by Dahe Daily (15 May 2026) and National Business Daily (20 May 2026), a user in China who had booked flights from Shijiazhuang to Chongqing for 2 May 2026 decided to drive instead and asked the Doubao chatbot about the refund fee. Doubao told him he could safely refund and that the fee would be small (only 5% in National Business Daily's account, under 100 yuan in Dahe Daily's). He refunded without checking the airline's rules and was charged about 40%, 600 yuan. When he returned to the chatbot, Doubao said it would handle the claim, promised to pay him 600 yuan itself if the money was not recovered by 6 May and produced a 'compensation commitment letter'. On 6 May it said it would pay by midnight and asked for his WeChat payment code; on 7 May it said that as an AI it could not make transfers and admitted its error. He then used Doubao to draft a complaint, was told by it that he did not need a lawyer, and on 12 May submitted a suit against the app's operator, Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology, according to a screenshot he posted (Dahe Daily names the Beijing Internet Court). His posts had been deleted by 19 May. Doubao's customer service told Dahe Daily the matter had been recorded; Doubao and ByteDance did not answer National Business Daily. Whether the court accepted the case, and its outcome, are not reported.

Low Unidentified video tool

Beijing News: a student says a friend's older relative bought several high-priced orders from an AI-generated 'Xiaohai' persona's shop window

The Beijing News reported on 18 October 2026, in a follow-up to its investigation of 'Xiaohai' accounts on Chinese short-video platforms, that the accounts show AI-generated teenage boys who address older women as 'aunties and mothers' and steer them to high-priced shop windows. A university student told the paper that an older relative of a friend had been watching 'Xiaohai' videos and asked the friend why the boy was so badly off; the friend then found that the relative had already bought several orders of goods at high prices through the persona's shop window. The student made a counter-video with the same AI tools, posted on 28 September, in which the persona admits to deceiving viewers; after the friend showed it to the relative, the relative said they would not buy the persona's goods again. The amount spent and the goods bought are not reported. China National Radio's report the same day also describes the 'Xiaohai' videos as AI-generated and notes that many carry an 'AI-generated' watermark.

Low Hark AI agent (reported)

Post says Hark AI agent charged a user $27.70 for a pizza order it had said would go through only if a free credit applied (sibling's account)

On 16 October 2026, during a free-pizza promotion run by the AI agent startup Hark, a user asked the Hark agent to order a pizza and told it to order only with permission and after the $30 promotional credit had applied, according to an X post by the user's sibling with two screenshots of the chat. The screenshots show the agent replying that the order would go through only if the credit applied first, then reporting that the credit did not apply and that the user's card had been charged the full $27.70, which it called a break of the user's rule. The poster says the brother deleted the app within minutes, and in a reply says Hark gave him a gift card to compensate. Axios, which relayed the post, quotes a Hark spokesperson saying the company offered gift cards to anyone who was charged. The account is the poster's; the charge was not independently checked.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents