A national survey of nearly 1,500 local news consumers, funded by the Walton Family Foundation and conducted by the Local Media Association (LMA) and Trusting News, reveals both concern and opportunity around how AI is being adopted in journalism. At the heart of it, audiences want transparency, human involvement and a clearer understanding of what AI means for their news.
John Humenik, chief strategy and operations officer of the Local Media Association and director of its AI Community Journalism Lab, and Lynn Walsh, assistant director of Trusting News, joined E&P Reports to unpack the findings and help newsrooms understand how to move forward responsibly.
Humans still matter
The overwhelming consensus among respondents — 98.8% — was that they want a human involved in any newsroom use of AI, especially around content creation. “Basically, what people are saying they want are guardrails in place,” said Walsh. “If you are going to use AI, they want to know that you are still doing it in an ethical way, and how you are making sure that it’s accurate.” She stressed that while AI can assist, “One of the only ways to make sure that it is accurate is to have that human in the loop. And they want to know.”
Humenik wasn’t surprised by the finding but saw it as a chance to open more conversations with the public. “What really gave us an opportunity was to have an incredible conversation with the audiences to help them understand what AI can do, help them understand how AI may be actually used in news,” he said. “It’s really going to have a conversation in the newsroom and externally with the community.” Community outreach, he added, was a “huge component of the lab.”
A cautious curiosity
Despite discomfort with content creation, a more nuanced picture emerged when looking deeper into the data. While 47.6% of respondents said they were uncomfortable overall, over 58% were either supportive, curious or cautiously open-minded. Walsh pointed out that about 30% of respondents across all versions of the comfort-level question said they were unsure, adding, “They’re really trying to tell you ‘I maybe don’t know enough about AI yet,’ or ‘I need more information before I can really see if your use of AI is something I’m comfortable with.’”
For Humenik, that middle ground represents a real opportunity. “There’s a great opportunity here all the way around for everyone involved in AI usage,” he said. “As Lynn mentioned, what they were okay with to a point — and they want more education on this as well — is translating content in other languages, converting text to audio, editing stories to improve clarity, grammar or spelling.” He added that curiosity extends to the reporting process itself: “What my understanding of it is the fascination and interest that audiences have with what journalists do to gather news and information.”
Use cases that resonate
Audiences aren’t completely opposed to AI. In fact, they’re open to its use when it’s used appropriately. Humenik referenced a chart on page 10 of the report showing that respondents were generally comfortable with background tasks like preparing interview questions or summarizing data. “And then after that, it’s really got to be the kind of unsure not knowing — what do you mean by this? How will that help you generate more content?” he said. “Now they’re very interested, but still, as Lynn points out, they’re unsure.”
Walsh said it’s vital to use this uncertainty as a springboard for transparency and engagement. “We have an opportunity to bring them along with us as we experiment,” she explained. “Because that’s what we’re all doing. We don’t have the answers, we’re experimenting.” And throughout that process, she added, newsrooms must “show them how we are being accurate, responsible and ethical through our use of this.”
Full disclosure, not fine print
Transparency isn’t just preferred; it’s non-negotiable. According to Walsh, “People want a human involved, but the other thing people really want is transparency.” She recommends that newsrooms make a clear statement about AI use, whether it’s “a simple letter from the editor,” an FAQ, or “a full-blown AI ethics policy.” She noted that “people said they want guardrails,” and newsrooms should detail what AI tools they use regularly — like “for spelling and grammar,” or “research” and “backgrounding of sources.”
But Walsh also emphasized that in each individual story or piece of content where AI is used, “people are saying in that moment, they want to know that.” She explained, “They want to know why it was used. They want to know how you still managed to ensure it was accurate. They also want to know what the benefit is to them.” Trusting News even created an AI trust kit for newsrooms with ready-to-use language for these disclosures, because “people do want to know why you decided to use this and how you're still making sure it’s ethical, accurate and responsible.”
Workflows, not replacements
Faced with the pressure to produce more content, some publishers are tempted to offload production onto AI. But Humenik advised starting with internal workflows. “Let’s start by walking through the workflows,” he said. “As you go through the workflows in a news operation, how can you, through efficiencies, get more time for local reporting?” He believes AI can help — but with limits: “What it can’t do is replace the human element of really sound news judgment.”
Walsh echoed this caution. “AI at this point cannot replace journalism. It cannot create new content. It needs information to be trained on to create that content,” she said. “AI is great at creating content. It is not good at providing context. And only humans can really provide that from a journalistic aspect.” She warned that if newsrooms over-rely on AI to meet quotas such as 15 stories a day, they risk losing the very connection and insight that local journalism provides.
Reconnecting through community
Looking ahead, both experts agreed that journalism’s future with AI isn’t just about technology; it’s about trust. “We should do this every chance we get — communicate with our audiences and let them know in real time what we’re doing,” said Humenik. “What news operations can do is slow it down and explain, slow it down and show the uses of it… and have the capabilities that are beneficial to news operations, but also beneficial to audiences.”
Walsh wants to see newsrooms return to their roots as community institutions. “AI can do content; it can’t do context. It cannot have conversations with people,” she said. “So, I really hope that journalists do not look at AI as this tool that is going to save us and instead look at it as a way for us to maybe do our jobs more efficiently.” The solution, she believes, is simple: “Go back out in your communities, show up at the library, show up at meetings, and talk to people — not to get quotes. Talk to people; have a conversation.”
For both leaders, AI can be useful, but never as a substitute for human connection. As Humenik put it, “We’re going to be creating better content all the way around because of the sense of truly understanding what we're doing, why we're doing it, and what’s the result of it.”
|
|
|
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here