AI can write now. What happens to reporters?

"The editor of Cleveland.com, Chris Quinn, wrote a column this week, describing how a college student who had applied for a reporting job withdrew their application when they found out how the publication uses AI. Besides using AI to help generate story ideas, the newsroom developed an "AI rewrite specialist" to write stories based on the material that reporters gather."

"By ditching writing, according to Quinn, their reporters have been able to reclaim an extra workday each week. The backlash was predictably vicious. On X, Axios reporter Sam Allard earned a lot of likes by comparing what Cleveland.com is doing to being an "AI content farmer," while various veteran journalists on Substack expressed various degrees of outrage and dismay."

"Most of the reaction was along the lines of this piece from journalist Stacey Woelfel: "Writing is an integral part of the reporting process." That's true, but I think what Quinn describes isn't so easily dismissed. After all, reporters often work in teams on single articles."

Matt Shumer's essay about AI replacing coding work has sparked broader concerns across knowledge work sectors, including journalism. Cleveland.com's editor Chris Quinn described implementing AI tools to generate story ideas and rewrite reporter-gathered material, enabling reporters to reclaim an extra workday weekly. This approach triggered significant backlash from journalists who argue writing is integral to reporting. However, Quinn's model reflects a legitimate shift in how newsrooms operate, as reporters increasingly collaborate on articles and AI handles routine writing tasks. The debate reveals tension between efficiency gains and concerns about whether automation diminishes journalism's fundamental purpose and quality.

Read at Fast Company