Photo courtesy of Tera Windstead on Pexels.com
If artificial intelligence can fully replace journalists, then journalism has already failed. AI can become an asset to newsrooms, but it cannot take on the human role without compromising the credibility on which the industry itself is based.
AI is already part of the most important newsrooms. In 2014, The Associated Press introduced Automated Insights into its newsroom to produce more than 3,000 earnings reports, bringing the world of journalism into contact with that of artificial intelligence. Before the introduction of artificial support, The Associated Press was able to produce about 300 reports per trimester. This reversal has brought several benefits to the newsroom. In addition to producing ten times more reports than initially, it allows journalists to focus their attention and energy on investigations, breaking news, and analysis.
The question arises, if journalism is considered the watchdog of democracy, what happens when the watchdog is partially automated?
In February 2024, The Washington Post introduced a new AI role that revolutionized the structure of newsrooms. According to Andrew Deck for Nieman Lab, Phoebe Connelly was the first person in history to take on the role of senior editor for AI strategy and innovation.
While the industry is making progress in this regard, anxiety and uncertainty about the use of AI in journalism remain constant. Connelly said she is not at all concerned about it. “We are so good at leveraging new tools to report and deliver the news. Generative AI is just the latest. Journalists introduce new facts into the conversation, and we do this through multiple-sourced, transparent reporting. This skill set and our core values are even more valuable in an AI-mediated landscape.”
The Washington Post’s recent move to AI jobs is certainly a smart one. It reflects an attempt aimed at seeking refuge. AI is now a structural presence in today’s newsrooms, and it is illusory and utopian to think of ousting it or doing without it. The new role is a way to have greater control over its use and application, because it must remain clear that a machine can never replace human abilities. We often forget that this machine, to which we entrust every question in search of a solution, does not think for itself, but is always instructed by humans.
AI has made a powerful entry into newsrooms, revolutionizing many aspects of traditional journalism. The benefits that most have highlighted are in its use in newsgathering, as Charlotte Hu, content contributor for IBM, stated. Several publications have used artificial intelligence in data collection, summarizing press conferences or translating news from around the world. It also has another use in news production and audience engagement.
In the field of news production, several newsrooms use AI as technical support and not as an actual replacement for the role of the journalist. The New York Times Trust team said it uses these tools to analyze large amounts of data useful for investigations and to create audio content related to articles and propose draft headlines, but under human supervision.
As for audience engagement, artificial intelligence is used to improve the reader’s experience through chatbots that are trained on newspaper archives, as well as being a means of recommending reading material and creating automatic summaries. This use, which remains under strict editorial control, aims to increase the time spent by individual readers on the site.
However, not everyone in the profession shares the same optimism. Some argue that AI could go against the values of the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, which advocates responsibility for accuracy and verification of data and facts.
Lecturer Kendra Love, a journalist with over 25 years of experience, argues that journalism is not just about putting words into a system and publishing them regardless of the outcome. She went on to analyze how the risk of heavy use of artificial intelligence could create journalists who do not do independent work, which is against the core principles of journalism.
“That does not mean technology has no place in a newsroom.” Love said. “But I am firmly pro-journalism. If AI exists anywhere in the workflow, it should be limited to mechanical support tasks, such as helping with editing or checking AP style, and even then it must be used with caution and transparency. It should never replace the process of reporting, interviewing, verifying, and thinking critically. Journalism is a craft built on credibility, and credibility comes from reporters doing the work themselves. Tools may evolve, but the ethical responsibility to gather truth and stand behind our stories will always belong to the journalist.”
This perspective is shared by many. In an article published by Brionna Crumpler for The AUMnibus, she quoted the editor of the Montgomery Independent, the local city newspaper, who, with his 20 years of experience, shared a similar opinion about AI. Brian Hodge explained that tools such as ChatGPT can be useful for certain tasks but cannot replace journalists because, he argues, they take away the authenticity and human voice that characterizes this work. “I’ve fed my own work into ChatGPT and said, ‘Write me in the style of this guy,’ and it doesn’t seem like me,” said Hodge. AI remains a support tool, but not a substitute for the profession.
I really identify with Love’s position, as journalists, if AI were to replace us, we would automatically become irrelevant. Our power and role is to serve the community through information, and if we don’t put ourselves out there, transparency and credibility are lost. As a future generation of journalists, my hope is that people understand that artificial intelligence, which is often seen as a benefit, is beneficial when used as a tool but with caution. Excessive abuse of it risks destroying an ancient profession that not everyone can perform. If artificial intelligence were to replace journalists, it would no longer be technological progress, but a generational defeat. Journalism is a fundamental aspect of society, it is made up of responsibility, transparency, and trustworthiness, and there are not technical functions that can be automated. They are human commitments, and they must remain ours.
