Journalism isn’t dead, it’s just learning to code

Journalism, bless its ink-stained soul, is democracy’s engine oil. Without it, the machinery seizes up. It informs, entertains, and occasionally terrifies us into action—all while holding power’s feet firmly to the fire. But like all good things (marmalade and the NHS included), it’s under threat. The latest menace? Generative AI. Cue dramatic music.

A newly published report on the future of news in the UK lays bare the stakes: trust in journalism is faltering, news avoidance is rising, dubious online sources are increasing, and economic pressures are forcing corners to be cut. Yet, amidst the grim headlines, the report also offers hope—if we act now to navigate the challenges and harness the opportunities. So, no need to sound the death knell just yet.?

Yes, AI can summarise articles, assist reporters, and even churn out (relatively) polished prose faster than you can say "deepfake." But before we call time on the news industry and retreat into a Netflix-induced coma, let’s remember that journalism’s role is not merely to regurgitate information. It’s to challenge, verify, and occasionally embarrass the powers that be. And that, dear reader, is not something you can simply outsource to an algorithm—no matter how clever it is at mimicking Shakespeare.

However, AI isn’t the villain. Not entirely, anyway. It’s a tool, like a pen, a press, or that ridiculous selfie stick you’re too embarrassed to admit you once owned, but with a little more magic. Used wisely, it could give journalism a shot in the arm—automating the dull bits and freeing up journalists to focus on the big stuff: corruption, injustice, and of course, celebrity feuds (all equally vital, obviously).

But left unchecked and directed poorly, AI could do to the news industry what Uber did to black cabs—strip it of dignity, resources, and the ability to pay for a pint at the end of a shift. Licensing deals and regulations aren’t just a bureaucrat’s daydream; they’re essential. Without them, Large Language Models (LLMs) could gorge themselves on the hard work of journalists, leaving smaller outlets to scrape by on crumbs or hit the fan altogether.?

And it’s not just about economics. Journalism isn’t just another business; it’s the lifeblood of a functioning democracy. It’s where we hear about what’s really going on (and, arguably more importantly, what isn’t). It’s how we argue, deliberate, and, on a good day, agree on a shared version of the truth. Lose that, and you’re not just losing the news—you’re losing the plot.

So, let’s not get all "doom and gloom." AI won’t kill journalism unless we let it. But neither will it save it unless we’re smart. Bad journalism and political motives of media owners have played their part too, lowering the credibility and appetite for news from traditional sources. The UK has a proud tradition of holding its leaders to account, even when they’d much rather be holding cocktails. If we can pair that pluck with balanced rules and a bit of common sense, we might just pull this off and save journalism as we knew it.?

Maintaining a free press in the face of AI advances is crucial, alas, so is not binding emerging technology in too much red tape and stifling the possibilities it offers. So, there you have it. Generative AI: a help, not a hindrance. Journalism: a necessity, not a luxury. And you: hopefully, just a little bit inspired to keep both alive.

I have a lifelong fascination for news, media, and how stories shape the world. I spend my days helping executives craft narratives that cut through the noise, but I’m also trying to take my own advice—writing opinionated, personality-driven pieces like this one. These views are, of course, entirely my own (and not the sort you’ll find in my employer’s corporate playbook). I believe a bit of wit, a touch of irreverence, and a clear voice go a long way, and I’m here to practice exactly that.