I agree that news journalism has changed in many ways. Itâs become much more competitive, and individual news media outlets report what their specific audience segments want to read. However, not every news outlet is FOX or its equivalents on the other end of the spectrum or supermarket tabloids. In addition, lower profit margins have resulted in staff cutbacks and a decline in fact-checking, like mistaking steam from a smokestack as smoke. The legitimate news outlets Iâm familiar with would fire a reporter who deliberately faked a photo and passed it off as the real thing.
Remember, I spent 15 years in journalism, my wife spent 20 years at another metro newspaper, and most of my friends are still writers, reporters, and editors. Today, for example, I have a conference call scheduled with a CNN editor about a writersâ workshop in which heâll be participating and that Iâve been hired to help promote. Iâm more than casually familiar with whatâs going on in the news business, and although itâs changed, the public has an incomplete picture of those changes and whatâs driving them.
Most news reporters I know are more concerned with how AI might affect writing and editing. For example, a reporter could collect the basic who, why, where, when, and what information for a news story as a series of notes, as theyâve always done. But instead of writing the story from those notes, AI could take those notes and write the story for them while fact-checking available details and checking for style and grammar errors.
But publications include more than the news business. They also include scientific journals, business magazines, medical newsletters, travel publications, annual reports, various trade journals, documentaries, academic publications, textbooks, etc. Whether or not and how to use AI-generated imagery depends on the publication. However, thereâs still (and always will be) a huge role for genuine photography and video rather than faked imagery.