"In fact, a recent report on the use of AI in news media from the Reuters Institute showed a pretty clear pattern of audiences' trust declining the more AI was used in the journalistic process. Only 12% of people were comfortable with fully AI-generated content, increasing to 21% for mostly AI, 43% for mostly human, and a respectable (but, notably, not amazing) 62% for fully human content."
"The data points to a fairly obvious takeaway that, if trust is your goal (which in journalism, it certainly is), you should use less AI, not more. But we're actually seeing precisely the opposite trend: Newsrooms worldwide are ramping up AI operations, with most major outlets, including The New York Times, using it in their process. Still others are using it to assist in creating content. ESPN, Fortune, and CoinDesk are just three examples of major, respected outlets leveraging AI to help write their articles."
"What's going on? Sure, there are industry pressures to incorporate AI, but the data suggests that you might sacrifice trust with your audience. That's a difficult problem, but it can be mitigated by prioritizing transparency. The data from the Reuters report creates a clear trend line, but it's important to keep in mind the question was generic, asking about comfort levels regarding "AI- and human-led news," and not about a specific use case."
Reuters Institute data shows audience trust declines as AI involvement in news increases: 12% comfortable with fully AI-generated content, 21% with mostly AI, 43% with mostly human, and 62% with fully human content. Major newsrooms are nonetheless expanding AI use, with outlets such as The New York Times, ESPN, Fortune, and CoinDesk integrating AI into their processes. Industry pressures drive adoption despite potential trust costs. Prioritizing transparency about when and how AI is used, and clarifying specific use cases, can reduce audience discomfort and help restore trust in AI-assisted journalism.
Read at Fast Company
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]