As we’ve reported previously, AI-generated journalism provokes distrust from readers, with audiences favoring a human touch. That might seem obvious, but a lot of questions lie buried in that broad statement. First, with so many ways to use AI, what does “AI-generated” mean, and how do audiences respond to different types and levels of AI use by journalists? Second, if readers want news outlets to be transparent about their AI use (as previous research has found), but if knowing about AI actually use lowers their trust and perceived accuracy, how should publishers proceed?
A pair of studies from the journal Digital Journalism addresses these questions. The first, “The effects of generative AI in news on media credibility and selectivity: Evidence from a conjoint experiment in Chile,” took an experimental approach. Participants were asked to compare media outlet AI policies, two at a time. The policies varied on seven different dimensions related to AI use and disclosure, and participants had to say which policy they found more credible and which outlet they would choose for news. ...
The second study, “Beyond the byline: Audience expectations for AI disclosure in news media” by Jessica Zier and Nicholas Diakopoulos, digs more specifically into the conundrum of AI labeling, using interviews.
