AI in Journalism Editorial

AI in Journalism by Liz Fisher

As in any other subject, there are certainly pros and cons to the use of AI in journalism, reporting, and newsrooms. Using AI to write anything from essays to screenplays, music, poetry, speeches, and even emails, has been a widespread subject of recent debate as AI has continued developing over the last few years. Capitalist ideology says that if it can increase efficiency and production, and even help people with their writing, then it must be a good tool. Haisten Willis explains that by training it to write certain types of articles, it can decrease time and increase output, allowing newswriters to focus their energy elsewhere. On the other hand, Rob Tornoe argues that since Large Language Models of AI are trained on existing data, they may generate articles and responses that are anywhere between plausible or completely made up, sometimes even plagiarized. Naturally, there are advantages and disadvantages to the incorporation of AI in newsrooms. While it is certainly dangerous to rely on AI to produce writing, it is not one-hundred percent impossible to use it as a tool, as long as it is healthily moderated and newsrooms prioritize quality over quantity.

The advantages to utilizing AI to write articles and cover events seem to abound. Willis outlines many of the topics it can cover, including politics and sports. This type of coverage means that journalists don’t have to personally cover every single event, giving them extra down time as well as the time they need to cover more important stories in-person. It definitely seems beneficial to use AI in this regard; allowing it to write stories using statistics from sporting events or polling stats for elections and local politics means that writers are freed up to spend more time writing the longer, more personal stories. Another advantage is that it can write in different languages, or translate articles to other languages, which makes news stories more widely accessible. Additionally, as AI has developed and been tested in the newsroom setting, news companies know when they need to double-check articles or cross-reference to ensure that all of the information provided is accurate. With these measures in place, AI can continue to develop positively and aid a newsroom rather than hinder it.

On the other hand, it is important to be extremely careful when utilizing AI, as it can lead to issues and oversights. While AI-written articles are often checked, there are consequences if they are not. Sometimes, the information cannot be trusted. As Tornoe points out, AI is not a human writer, so it is not truly creating an article. It is trained on massive amounts of data, which means that what it does write is an imitation, which results in inaccurate information, made-up facts and stories, and plagiarism. If such articles are posted, the public will feel they can no longer trust their news sources, which could have devastating consequences for news companies. Furthermore, Tornoe argues that AI writing is missing a unique human quality — readers can’t connect with a story written by AI because it lacks what a human writer has: empathy, even when writing from a non-biased perspective. Certainly, the development of AI has proven to be a helpful tool for journalists, but one that should be moderated closely. At a large company, it may be in their best interest to rely on AI to generate articles whose main purpose is to share statistics or even to generate article titles. At a small company, however, they run the risk of eliminating necessary jobs, stripping them from valuable employees. A news company that values truth and accessible information should also appreciate the value of its human employees and their skills. If these opportunities are taken from employees, it undercuts their initial claims of who and what they value. Additionally, it may turn away potential employees and lead to a worker deficit in journalism.

The issue we are running into here is really that of alienation. Call it a Marxist idea, an issue of Cultural Materialism, a capitalist critique — either way, it cannot be ignored in this conversation. Marx described it as the process that occurs when a worker loses their connection to their labor and the product they are creating, when the work ceases to have purpose. When this happens, the worker detaches themself from the work, unable to explain why it matters, and they become jaded. Marx warned that this would only happen more often as machines are introduced into the workplace. In this case, the machine is AI. The goal of a capitalist society is to produce more of a product, and faster, in order to make more money for the owner or a group of “elites.” This does not exclude journalism and news sources. Journalism, at its core, is meant to help spread true and accurate information to anyone who wants to remain informed. With the introduction of AI, this would hopefully aid that goal. However, it may only succeed in making more money for the wealthy, generating mediocre content, and alienating the actual writers from their original purpose.

        All of this in consideration, AI is no simple topic. Many others have dedicated more time, more research, and more pages to exploring the complexities of the debate surrounding the ethical considerations of AI. Do the pros outweigh the cons? Can it ever truly create content or art? Will it replace human workers? Can we properly moderate its use so that it remains helpful without alienating journalists? How can we continue to develop AI so that it does more help than harm? Some of these questions are more subjective than others. Some may only be answered with the clarity of time or hindsight. In the meantime, it is imperative to closely moderate the use of AI in journalism. Ultimately, each newsroom must decide for itself what is acceptable, what is helpful, and what is or isn’t necessary. To be sure, the priorities should still be accurate information and quality articles and stories, not the quantity of true or untrue statistics they can spit out in one day. It may then be the responsibility of newsrooms to ensure that society still values quality writing and the journalists behind the articles. Moderation will ensure that newsrooms remain efficient and necessary, but also credible in their dissemination of information.