Regular readers of this newsletter know I am unrelentingly optimistic about the potential for GenAI to help us control costs, take tedious tasks off our brilliant employees’ hands, and build new products that serve news consumers better and make money for us.

Still, this edition reflects a few sobering realities we need to keep in mind as we navigate the new GenAI universe. Of course, we all want to use AI wisely and thoughtfully. So, today, let’s glance over some research on the bigger picture — whether it is the impact on the humans who work for us, on our audience’s trust in our output, or on the ways in which we are trying to reach news consumers.

Sonali

Reading the tea leaves on GenAI announcements

At first glance, it might look like we are starting to see a bit of a backlash against GenAI.

Consider this: The British Broadcasting Corporation put out a 24-page statement on research it has undertaken pointing out that GenAI assistants such as ChatGPT, Copilot, and Google Gemini often get facts wrong or make things up: In its experiment, 51% of all AI answers to questions about the news were judged to have significant problems.

I realise the possibility of “hallucination” by GenAI assistants is not breaking news for anyone who reads this newsletter. Indeed, some members of the INMA community have been in touch to point out to me that some inaccuracies could well have been prevented because the prompts the BBC used for its experiment were very basic.

I have also had great conversations in the past with innovative colleagues at the BBC who have reminded me the Beeb is a great believer in using GenAI responsibly — and indeed that they believe it is vital they experiment with GenAI and are transparent with their audience about this.

Why, then, would they publish this paper? I believe it is because they are concerned about consumers getting their news from answer engines by typing in basic queries like the ones they used, and they are also worried about the erosion of trust. 

It is also a reminder that GenAI is a black box right now, according to Peter Archer, BBC programme director of GenAI. 

“Publishers, like the BBC, should have control over whether and how their content is used, and AI companies should show how assistants process news along with the scale and scope of errors and inaccuracies they produce. This will require strong partnerships between AI and media companies and new ways of working that put the audience first and maximise value for all. The BBC is open and willing to work closely with partners to do this.”

Speaking of which: Scandinavian news publisher Schibsted has signed up as a partner with OpenAI. 

“Although AI sometimes arouses skepticism, the reality is that AI-generated content is no different from other content in one crucial aspect — we are always responsible for what we publish, regardless of how it has been produced,” said Martin Schori, deputy publisher of Schibsted’s Aftonbladet.

“We want our journalism to be where the audience is. This agreement ensures that our content is visible and that the source — Schibsted’s media house — is always clear. If even more people start using the chatbots and we are not there, this could, of course, threaten our position as Sweden’s leading media house in the long term.”

The real threat may come from elsewhere, though: Research shows GenAI in the workplace is actually making us less capable.

A study by none other than Microsoft finds GenAI can improve worker efficiency but also inhibit critical engagement with work and can potentially lead to long-term overreliance on the tool and diminished skill for independent problem-solving.

“Higher confidence in GenAI’s ability to perform a task is related to less critical thinking effort. When using GenAI tools, the effort invested in critical thinking shifts from information gathering to information verification; from problem-solving to AI response integration; and from task execution to task stewardship. Knowledge workers face new challenges in critical thinking as they incorporate GenAI into their knowledge workflows.”

Want more? How about this study by Gartner that points out by 2028, almost one-third of sales staff  entering the workforce will lack critical sales skills due to an overreliance on AI technologies​?

“As sales organisations increase their interest and dependence on AI-enabled technologies, there will be a rapid decline in seller’s analytical as well as social skills, such as effective communication, which are essential for relationship building with customers,” Gartner wrote.

All three of these pieces of research are a worthwhile reminder that GenAI is good at some things — such as brainstorming, translation, converting text to speech, or performing repetitive tasks like keywording — and should not be blindly relied upon for other tasks. Let’s keep our wits about us as we navigate this.

Wondering how to respond to AI-driven changes in the news ecosystem? You’ll want to sign up for our upcoming master class on building a direct relationship and habits with your audience.

4 GenAI challenges for the news business 

The news media business is at an intriguing moment in time as it faces four interesting challenges related to GenAI, according to the latest report from FT Strategies.

The consultancy, part of the Financial Times, took a look at the Reuters Institute’s predictions for 2025, compared them with its own findings and data sets, and reflected on what they saw.

First, even as AI-generated answers to search queries become ubiquitous, search traffic is incredibly important. Organic search makes up over 40% of overall referrals for a data set of 106 publishers and is more important for many news organisations than direct traffic.

“This is a concerning trend for a few reasons,” wrote authors George Montagu and Sarah Dear: 

1. It’s clear not all news organisations are cut out for a “destination strategy” pursued by the likes of The New York Times. 
2. Search referrals are becoming less predictable as generative AI is incorporated into the experience. 
3. Social referrals are already down, putting downward pressure on other sources of traffic. 

But there is reason for optimism as well: “The same dataset has shown that the proportion and volume of traffic from organic search has increased in the last 18 months (except for a small contraction in the last two months of 2024, which should be monitored).”

In other words: Brace for the worst, but we seem to be OK for now.

A second existent challenge is the drop in social referral traffic — and the rise of AI answer engines. 

Also noteworthy: “Social platforms that publishers were planning to put more effort into are relatively low performers and also experienced decline in 2024: TikTok (only 8k and 80% decline), Instagram (1.35mn and 4% decline), and LinkedIn (375k and 27% decline). This calls into question whether these publishers should focus on these platforms, especially if referrals or direct monetisation are the primary objectives.” 

This is important because many news organisations are still building or buying social media tools. Is that going to pay off or is it a case of too little, too late?

By contrast: ChatGPT contributed 100k session referrals in December 2024, having only recorded single-digits between January to April 2024. Perplexity has experienced similar growth. 

Should we be looking at optimising for answer engines along with search engines, then?

What about the competition from creators on platforms such as YouTube and TikTok? GenAI will only make it more intense — and lead to new partnerships.

GenAI will make personality more important and solo operations more scalable, the report pointed out. “The only thing that holds creators back [from growing their audience] is how often they can be in front of the camera or microphone. The idea that they can write scripts which are generated into video content or any other format that they want [by using AI] is pretty exciting [for them].” 

And finally, it appears news media business leaders are more excited about GenAI than their journalists are.

“Editorial teams are the least optimistic about AI, with only 36% expressing positivity,” the report said.

“Those who are most optimistic include senior leadership (57%), perhaps because of their insulation to job losses and the real possibility of GenAI reducing operational costs. Although news use cases have increased, insufficient training and dedicated time for upskilling are major blockers for further adoption … 34% of respondents said that they had received insufficient training and 28% said that they did not have enough time to upskill.”

Worthwhile links 

• GenAI and jobs: ABC’s union gets protection against AI replacing workers in its contract.
• GenAI and automation: AI is used more widely for augmentation, rather than automation, Anthropic says.
• GenAI and copyright: Thomson Reuters has won the first major AI copyright case in the United States, which may have ramifications for future lawsuits based on the doctrine of fair use.
• GenAI and copyright II: More than a dozen news organisations joined hands and filed a lawsuit against Cohere, a Canadian AI company valued at over US$5 billion.They include: Advance Local Media, Condé Nast, The Atlantic, Forbes Media, The Guardian, Business Insider, LA Times, McClatchy Media Company, Newsday, Plain Dealer Publishing Company, Politico, The Republican Company, Toronto Star Newspapers, and Vox Media.
• GenAI and true crime: A “true crime documentary” series has millions of views; the murders are all AI-generated. 
• GenAI and summaries: Don’t want a summary? You need to use some strong language.
• GenAI and you: Chat with a future version of yourself and reduce anxiety, courtesy MIT.
• GenAI and subscriptions: Looking for a gift for a young person? Consider an AI subscription. 
• An AI diversion: Avoid boomer prompts for reasoning models. They are exactly what they sound like.

About this newsletter

Today’s newsletter is written by Sonali Verma, based in Toronto, and lead for the INMA Generative AI Initiative. Sonali will share research, case studies, and thought leadership on the topic of generative AI and how it relates to all areas of news media.

This newsletter is a public face of the Generative AI Initiative by INMA, outlined here. E-mail Sonali at sonali.verma@inma.org or connect with her on INMA’s Slack channel with thoughts, suggestions, and questions.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .