Resistance is (kinda) futile

The future of journalism will not be shaped by standing still

An increasingly clear fault line is opening up in the debate over AI and journalism. Reflecting on his time at the Perugia International Journalism Festival, David Caswell said that the sessions revealed two distinct camps: a "vanguard" of publishers actively exploring the possibilities of AI, and a "rearguard" who view the technology primarily through the lens of risk and disruption.

The caution of the rearguard is not without cause. Their instincts — to defend trust, independence and rigour — are understandable and honourable. But, as our co-founder Ivan Massow argued in a piece for Tomorrow’s Publisher this week, protection alone is not a strategy.

David is right that we must not let this debate become between two disconnected groups who won’t talk to each other because of doctrinal differences. Nevertheless, I have a question for the rearguard. What do you expect to happen? What is your ideal outcome?

Because much of the sceptical response is framed around what must be prevented, rather than what must be built. There remains little articulation of how journalism’s essential values might not merely survive the coming changes, but be renewed through them. Resistance without renewal is unlikely to succeed.

In my view, if journalism is to thrive in an AI-driven world, it will not be by seeking shelter from technological change, but by engaging with it — critically, certainly, but also creatively. Tools, practices, and institutions will need to be reimagined, not merely defended.

Others will take a different view and at Tomorrow’s Publisher we’d like to hear from them. Please get in touch. We’d like to be a forum for this debate.