Caitlin Rauch Dunleavy

July 30, 2026 — 9 min read

Executive Summary

Artificial intelligence has become part of everyday newsroom operations. From research assistance and workflow automation to SEO and audience insights, AI is reshaping how journalism is made. At the same time, publishers are balancing the obvious efficiency gains from AI with the potential for lost consumer trust.

This tension lies at the heart of how publishers are approaching AI: cautious adoption that is not seeking to replace human judgment and reporting, but to augment it. Unlike sectors like coding, journalism cannot be done effectively by robots, particularly because trust is a glaring issue for the industry.

This report is based on a survey of 40 media professionals, with nearly half of respondents holding executive leadership positions. It also includes qualitative findings from a journalist and media strategist, Jess Awtry.

Key Findings

• Trust remains fragile. Nearly two-thirds of respondents describe trust in media today as low.
• Human journalism remains the defining differentiator in maintaining audience trust, suggesting that accountability and editorial judgment become more valuable as AI adoption grows.
• Transparency is becoming a competitive advantage with audiences increasingly judging publishers on how openly they explain their reporting processes and use of AI.
• AI has become operational in newsrooms with usage including research assistance, productivity, SEO, and audience insights.
• AI is being deployed to support journalists more often than to replace them.
• Governance is lagging adoption with companies not formally tracking AI usage and having no clear owner responsible for AI strategy.

The findings reveal an industry embracing AI while redefining how trust is earned, measured, and maintained.

The End of Assumed Trust

For decades, trust was one of journalism's greatest competitive advantages. It was a legacy, built over decades in societies that had far more constrained information ecosystems. That’s shifted markedly as technology has decentralized media and the news industry itself has been seen to have erred in critical areas like the run-up to the Iraq War, the Great Financial Crisis, and the many political psychodramas of the past decade.

Established publishers built credibility through consistent reporting, recognizable editorial standards, and strong institutional brands. Readers might disagree with a publication's perspective, but they generally understood how its journalism was produced and who was accountable for it. However, AI has dramatically lowered the barriers to producing information. That has shifted trust from being inherited to being earned. 

"‘Trust me’ is now officially for people. ‘Show me’ has got to be for brands."

 — Jess Awtry, Senior Research Director, Pew Research Center 

Nearly two-thirds (65%) of respondents describe trust in media today as somewhat or very low, showing that concerns about credibility extend beyond public perception and are shared by the people working inside the industry.

Based on a Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2026, only a quarter (25%) of Americans say they trust the news most of the time.

Yet the findings are far from pessimistic.

Respondents agreed that fundamentals of quality journalism still earn audience confidence. Accuracy of reporting stands out as the strongest influence on trust (63%), followed by direct audience relationships (43%) and brand reputation (40%).

Notably, clear labeling of AI use ranks far lower (10%), reinforcing that respondents continue to see trust as rooted in journalistic practices rather than technology itself.

The findings point to a few main sources that threaten media trust. More than one-third (36%) identify AI-generated content volume as the biggest source of tension between scale and trust, followed by concerns around aggregation replacing original reporting (24%).

This points to an opportunity for legacy news publishers to skip the volume game of trying to keep up with the firehose of AI slop and instead pivot to quality, trusted journalism.

Publishers are also approaching AI with nuance. Rather than viewing it as either wholly positive or negative, 58% believe AI presents both risks and opportunities, while 37% believe it is weakening editorial trust. Very few respondents believe AI has had no meaningful impact. This suggests publishers are less concerned about AI itself than about how it is implemented and communicated.

Every organization represented in the survey reports taking concrete steps to strengthen, if not rebuild, audience trust.

"There is no assumption of trust anymore."

— Jess Awtry, Senior Research Director, Pew Research Center

Four in five respondents (80%) are investing in direct audience engagement through newsletters, events, comments, or community initiatives. Three-quarters (75%) prioritize original reporting, while 70% emphasize a clear separation between editorial and sponsored content. Editorial standards, transparency updates, and source disclosure also rank among the industry's most common trust-building initiatives.

Publishers are adopting an “open kitchen” approach. They’re moving away from relying solely on institutional reputation and toward demonstrating credibility through visible editorial practices, transparent reporting, and ongoing relationships with readers.

Publishers Already Know What Builds Trust

Trust is often tossed around as a sound bite. It’s in the details where things get murky. While publishers are evolving how they build trust, they are not necessarily evolving how they measure it.

Data shows 58% note engagement metrics such as time spent and return visits are still primary trust indicators within their organization. 

More than half track subscription or retention rates (53%), while half incorporate direct audience feedback (50%). Far fewer use audience surveys (38%) or brand perception studies (25%), and nearly one-third (30%) report they do not formally measure trust at all.

For much of the digital era, publishers have optimized for one thing above almost everything else: engagement.

Clicks, pageviews, time on site, and social shares have shaped editorial strategies and advertising models for years. While these metrics remain valuable indicators of audience attention, this research suggests they are becoming less reliable measures of something publishers increasingly care about: trust.

"What you engage with isn't always something you trust."

— Jess Awtry, Senior Research Director, Pew Research Center

Most respondents (97%) say having a direct relationship with audiences is important for maintaining editorial trust, with nearly one-third finding it extremely important. 

💡Key Takeaway:

Trust is downstream. The leading indicator of high trust is high connection to an audience. The publishers best positioned for the future are the ones that build the strongest direct relationships with their audiences.

Human Journalism Becomes More Valuable

Trust in media organizations is earned through relationships, accountability, editorial judgment, and transparency. These are qualities that cannot be automated. Publishers are understandably wary of throwing out that advantage in a drive for efficiency. 

Reuters Institute found that trust in news delivered through AI chatbots is just 20% globally, compared with 37% trust in news overall, highlighting that audiences remain significantly more skeptical of AI-mediated news.

"The last thing we have is trust in humans."

— Jess Awtry, Senior Research Director, Pew Research Center

Nearly all respondents (94%) say human-led journalism is very or extremely important to maintaining audience trust.

"Make sure our reporters are doing the dot-connecting things."

 — Jess Awtry, Senior Research Director, Pew Research Center 

But the findings go even further. When asked what actually builds trust, respondents overwhelmingly pointed to qualities that are inherently human: direct relationships with readers (88%), transparency in sourcing and reporting (69%), human-led journalism (69%), a consistent editorial voice (66%), and brand reputation (63%).

💡Key Takeaway:

The human premium still exists in journalism. Publishers believe journalism shifts toward context, verification, accountability, and original reporting will become points of distinction. Robots are not (yet) doing on-the-scene reporting.

Since Watergate, journalism has chased "unbiased" as its brand. That's backfired: publishers bend over backward to look "balanced," and partisans on both sides still call it biased whenever it doesn't favor them. Publishers are giving up on pleasing everyone and focusing on transparency instead. 

"Publishers are a little bit ahead of the public in using AI—and a little bit behind the public in disclosing it."

 — Jess Awtry, Senior Research Director, Pew Research Center 

Overall, respondents place greater emphasis on more traditional indicators of credibility for building trust in media looking ahead. Two-in-five (41%) identify direct audience relationships as the most important driver of future trust. 

These findings reinforce a broader shift taking place across the industry. Reuters Institute researchers argue that meaningful, direct relationships with audiences are the foundation for lasting trust, particularly as more news consumption is mediated through platforms and AI interfaces that weaken publishers' direct connection with readers.

Rather than assuming audiences will trust established brands, publishers recognize that trust must be demonstrated through visible editorial practices.

"There is no assumption of trust anymore."

— Jess Awtry, Senior Research Director, Pew Research Center

💡Key Takeaway:.

Transparency is evolving from an editorial principle into a competitive advantage that helps readers distinguish trustworthy journalism from an already crowded information landscape.

AI Is Transforming Workflows, Not Journalism

The media industry has largely moved beyond debating whether AI belongs in the newsroom. The question is how to best use it – and how to keep the human in the loop.

Every respondent in this study reported using AI in some capacity, making it one of the few areas where adoption is nearly universal. Organizations are also continuing to invest in the technology. Nearly three-in-four (73%) media professionals say AI investment has increased over the past year, with 28% reporting it has increased significantly. Only 23% say investment has stayed the same or decreased. AI is no longer viewed as an experimental technology. AI has become an established part of publishers' newsroom strategy.

Rather than using AI to replace journalism, publishers are overwhelmingly deploying it to support the work surrounding journalism with 84% primarily investing in AI for internal productivity tools. 

Research assistance is by far the most common application (87%), while more than half (53%) use AI for SEO optimization, and 42% leverage it for audience insights. Publishers also report using AI for summaries and headline writing (both 37%), helping editorial teams work more efficiently without fundamentally changing the reporting process. By contrast, only 18% currently use AI for article drafting, and no respondents reported that their organizations are not using AI at all.

💡Key Takeaway:

Transparency Is Becoming a Competitive Advantage

Although AI adoption is widespread, organizational maturity remains more measured. Just under one-third (30%) of respondents describe their organizations as advanced in AI readiness, while the largest share (44%) characterize themselves as moderately prepared, and more than one-fifth (21%) say they are still in the early stages of adoption.

While AI adoption is widespread, organizations are not moving forward at the same pace internally. More than half of respondents (53%) describe adoption as "mixed," suggesting AI implementation often varies across departments or functions. Only 18% say AI is fully embraced across their organization, while relatively few report significant resistance (15%), indicating the challenge is less about opposition than organizational alignment.

💡Key Takeaway:

The industry is no longer experimenting with whether AI can be useful. It is learning where AI creates meaningful value and how to implement organizational adoption. 

The Governance Gap

Bold forecasts of AI adoption rarely meet first contact with the reality of governance within large organizations. If AI adoption defines the media industry's present, governance is likely to define its future.

More than six in ten respondents (62%) report that their organizations do not formally track AI usage. Only 12% say AI is measured against performance outcomes.

Ownership is equally fragmented. Nearly one-third (32%) say executive leadership is responsible for AI strategy, while just 12% identify editorial leadership as the primary owner. Almost one-quarter (24%) report having no clear owner at all.

AI is becoming embedded faster than organizations are establishing the policies, accountability, and measurement frameworks needed to manage it. This challenge extends beyond publishing. KPMG's Global AI Pulse Q2 2026 found that while 75% of organizations say their CEO actively owns AI as a strategic priority, only 24% identify the CEO or executive committee as ultimately accountable for AI-informed decisions, highlighting the gap between executive sponsorship and operational accountability.

Fewer than half (44%) consider their AI initiatives successful, with many reporting mixed results (29%) or indicating that it is simply too early to assess long-term impact (18%). These findings suggest publishers are still moving from experimentation toward concrete, measurable practices.

AI strategy remains heavily dependent on technology vendors. Forty-four percent identify AI/LLM vendors as their most important partners, followed by internal tools (32%) and publishing platforms such as WordPress VIP (26%). Far fewer rely on agencies or consultants, suggesting organizations are building AI capabilities through technology infrastructure rather than external advisory relationships.

Many organizations rely on AI or large language model providers as important technology partners (38%), two-in-four (41%) report working without formal external partnerships. About one-quarter (24%) report these partners have limited involvement. Only 3% say they actively shape their organization’s AI strategy. 

Publishers seem to be treating AI strategy less like something they can hand off to vendors and more like a capability they need to build themselves. Vendors can supply the tools, but the harder choices—how AI fits into editorial workflows, how it is governed, and how it is used responsibly—still sit with the organization. 

💡Key Takeaway:

AI adoption requires sophisticated frameworks for its use and implementation. The data suggests publishers are taking a range of approaches to AI implementation, with no single operating model yet emerging across the industry.

The Future Newsroom

The findings suggest respondents expect meaningful organizational change in the long run, even if their shifts to date have been incremental.

Most organizations are also prioritizing credibility over publishing speed, with nearly two-thirds (64%) identifying editorial credibility as the higher priority despite growing AI capabilities.

However, many organizations expect AI to replace or reduce roles in the near future. Nearly two-thirds (61%) believe it will reduce or replace some roles, although only 3% expect those changes to be significant. 

This reflects a broader shift happening across industries. As KPMG’s Global AI Pulse Q2 2026 report states, organizations are moving beyond asking whether to adopt AI and are increasingly focused on redesigning workflows, roles, and operating models around human-AI collaboration. For publishers, that means the conversation is shifting from individual AI tools toward how AI fits into editorial processes and decision-making.

Areas expected to be most impacted by AI include operational functions (55%), followed by content production (30%), entry-level editorial roles (24%), marketing (24%), and SEO or audience development (21%). Only 12% believe research or fact-checking roles are likely to be reduced, while 30% expect no workforce reductions at all. Respondents expect AI to have the biggest effect on operational and production work, not core journalistic functions. This supports the broader point that publishers see AI as changing how journalism gets made, not why it matters.

When prompted further, 30% anticipate hiring fewer overall entry-level employees because of AI. This finding also points to a longer-term challenge for the industry. If fewer journalists start in traditional entry-level roles, publishers may need new ways to help future reporters build editorial judgment, sourcing skills, and investigative experience.

💡Key Takeaway:

Journalism is a small C conservative profession. The newsroom of the future may look different, but the data suggest its most important role will remain unchanged: producing trustworthy reporting.

Conclusion

Across this research, one message emerged consistently: publishers are embracing AI while reaffirming the value of quality journalism that’s rooted in human-led processes. 

There’s a fair criticism of the journalism profession for being too conservative, risk-averse, and process-oriented. The survey findings suggest those principles are carrying forward into the AI era rather than being replaced. Respondents consistently emphasized the importance of human journalism (44%), editorial standards (41%), and transparency around AI use (38%) as the factors most likely to strengthen trust in the years ahead.

At the same time, organizations are actively integrating AI into newsroom workflows to improve efficiency, streamline routine tasks, and support editorial decision-making.

Respondents do not see technology and trust as competing priorities. Instead, AI is highlighting the importance of transparency, accountability, and direct audience relationships. In a world where information is abundant, trust depends not only on what publishers produce, but on how clearly they demonstrate the people, processes, and standards behind it.

AI will continue to improve efficiency and reshape newsroom operations. But the competitive advantage will belong to publishers that invest in what AI cannot replicate: original reporting, editorial judgment, transparency, and trusted audience relationships.

In an era of abundant information, trust becomes journalism's scarcest—and most valuable—asset.Years of private outings and the consistency of their connection speak for themselves.

About the Research

This report is based on a survey of 40 media professionals with nearly half of respondents holding executive leadership positions, providing a strategic perspective on how media organizations are approaching trust, AI adoption, audience relationships, and editorial credibility. Additionally, the research was supplemented by qualitative interviews with industry leaders.

Respondent Profile

Company Role

Executive Leadership: 47%

Editorial / Journalist: 13%

Editorial Leadership: 9%

Product: 9%

Revenue / Advertising: 9%

Audience Development: 6%

Marketing: 3%

Technology: 3%

Organization Type

Digital Publisher: 38%

Legacy Media Company: 25%

Newsletter-First Media Brand: 13%

B2B Media Organization: 9%

Agency / Consulting: 6%

Broadcast Media: 3%

Platform / Technology: 3%

Independent Creator: 3%

Other: 6%

Age

25–34: 13%

35–44: 22%

45–54: 31%

55–64: 22%

65+: 9%

Prefer not to say: 3%