Will artificial intelligence be the death of journalism?

In mid-May 2023, The Irish Times published an article that accused women who use fake tan of mocking those with naturally dark skin. The op-ed was initially said to be written by Adriana Acosta-Cortez, a 29-year-old Ecuadorian health worker living in north Dublin.

But no such person existed. “The article and the accompanying byline photo may have been produced, at least in part, using generative AI technology,” read an editorial in The Irish Times four days after the piece first published.

Two months later, HoldtheFrontPage— a news website for journalists with a focus on regional media across the UK— published an investigative piece documenting how artificial intelligence (AI) was used to launch a publication purporting to be called The Bournemouth Observer, which turned out to be a fake newspaper. “It was obvious that the content was written by AI because the writing was so bad,” editor of HoldtheFrontPage, Paul Linford, told Index. “But since then, AI has got much better at writing stories, and I suspect it will eventually become harder to spot when writing is being done by AI or real journalists,” said Linford.

Index on Censorship was also caught out by a journalist calling themselves Margaux Blanchard whose article was published in the Spring edition of the magazine. Ironically it was about journalism in Guatemala and written by AI.  Others – Wired and Business Insider – also fell victim to “Margaux”.

James Barrat claimed AI “will eventually bring about the death of writing as we know it.” The American documentary maker and author has been researching and writing about AI for more than a decade. His previous books include Our Final Invention: Artificial Intelligence and the End of the Human Era (2013), which ChatGPT recently ingested. “There are presently ongoing lawsuits about this because OpenAI took my book [without my permission] and didn’t pay me,” Barrat explained. “Right now, if you tell ChatGPT ‘write in the style of James Barrat’ it doesn’t produce an exact replica, but it’s adequate, and machine writing is getting better all the time.”

AI “will eliminate 30% of all jobs”

In early September, Barrat published The Intelligence Explosion: When AI Beats Humans at Everything (2025). The book makes two bold predictions. First, AI has the potential in the not-too-distant future to potentially match, and perhaps even surpass, our species’ intelligence. Second, by 2030 AI will eliminate 30 percent of all jobs done by humans, including writers. Freelance journalists will benefit in the short term, Barrat claimed. “Soon a basic features writer, using AI, will be able to produce twice as much content and get paid twice as much,” he said. “But in long run the news organisations will get rid of [most] writers because people won’t care if content is written by AI or not.”

Tobias Rose-Stockwell did not share that view. “There will always be a market for verified accurate information, which requires humans,” the American writer, designer, technologist and media researcher said. “So truthful journalism isn’t going away, but it’s going to be disrupted by AI, which can now generate content in real time. This will lead to more viral falsehoods, confusion and chaos in our information ecosystem.”

Rose-Stockwell elaborated on this topic in Outrage Machine (2023). The book documents how the rise of social media in the mid-2000s was made possible by algorithms, which are mathematical instructions that process data to produce specific outcomes. In the early days of social media users viewed their feeds in chronological order. Eventually, though, Facebook, Instagram, X, TikTok, and other social media platforms realised it was more profitable to organise that information via algorithmic feeds, powered by artificial intelligence and, in particular, machine learning (ML) where AI is used to identify behaviours and patterns that may be missed by human observers. ML tools analyse users’ behaviour, preferences, and interactions, keeping them emotionally engaged for longer. “Feed algorithms are much better at re-coordinating content than any human ever could,” said Rose-Stockwell. “They can even create bespoke little newspapers or television shows for us.”

“AI is already in the process of rapidly transforming journalism,” said Dr Tomasz Hollanek, a technology ethics specialist at the University of Cambridge with expertise in intercultural AI ethics and ethical human-AI interaction design. “As AI systems become more adept at producing content that appears authentic, detecting fabricated material will get harder.”

Hollanek spoke about editors giving journalists clear guidelines about when and where AI can be used. The Associated Press, for instance, currently allows staff to test AI tools but bans publishing AI-generated text directly.

“What’s important about these guidelines is that while they recognise AI as a new tool, they also stress that journalism already has mechanisms for accountability,” said Hollanek. He also criticised the sensationalist tone journalists typically take when writing about AI, pointing to unnecessary hype, which leads to distorted public understanding and skewed policy debates.

“Journalists strengthening their own critical AI literacy will make the public more informed about AI and more capable of shaping its trajectory.”

AI’s role in news “needs to be trackable”

Petra Molnar, a Canadian lawyer and anthropologist who specialises in migration and human rights, claimed “the general public needs to understand that AI is not some abstract tool out there, but it’s already structuring our everyday lives.”

Molnar said there is an urgent need for public awareness campaigns that make AI’s role in news and politics visible and trackable. She described companies such as Meta, X, Amazon, and OpenAI as “global gatekeepers [of information] with the power to amplify some voices while silencing others, often reinforcing existing inequalities.”

“Most people experience AI through tools like news feeds, predictive texts, or search engines, yet many do not realise how profoundly AI shapes what they see and think,” said Molnar, who is the associate director of the Refugee Law Lab at York University, Toronto— which undertakes research and advocacy about legal analytics, artificial intelligence, and new border control technologies that impact refugees.“AI is often presented as a neutral tool, but the reality is that it encodes power.”

Last year, Molnar published The Walls Have Eyes: Surviving Migration in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (2024). The book draws attention to a recent proliferation across the globe of digital technologies that are used to track and survey refugees, political dissidents, and frontline activists crossing borders in times of conflict. Molnar claimed that “AI threatens to accelerate the collapse of journalism by privileging speed and engagement over accuracy and depth.” She cited examples of journalists using OpenAI-generated text tools to churn our surface-level articles that echo sensational framings around migration, without investigative depth.

“Automated systems may generate content that looks like journalism, but it’s stripped of accountability and critical inquiry that’s required to tell complex stories,” said Molnar. “Journalism’s future depends on human reporters who can investigate power and rigorously fact check, something AI simply cannot replicate.”

Human oversight

Sam Taylor, campaigns & communications officer at the UK’s National Union of Journalists (NUJ), shared that view. “Editors and writers should exercise caution before using AI in their work,” he said. “Generative AI often draws on databases from the internet that contains stereotypes, biases, and misinformation.”

“To maintain and strengthen public trust in journalism, AI must only be used as an assistive tool with human oversight,” said NUJ general secretary, Laura Davison.

Everyone Index spoke to agreed that AI, for all its flaws, offers journalists enormous benefits, including automating mundane routine tasks, like transcription and data sorting. AI can also make data journalism, exploring large data sets to uncover stories, much more accessible as AI can crunch the data and identify interesting nuggets far faster than a person can. This will leave journalists with more time and energy for critical thinking, and ultimately, to tell more complex and nuanced stories.

But there was also an overwhelming consensus that AI cannot fact-check accurately or be trusted as a credible verifier of information. Not least because it suffers from hallucinations. “This means due to the complexity of what is going on inside it hallucinates,” James Barrat explained. “When this happens, AI gets confused and tells lies.”

“The jury is still out on whether or not this hallucination problem can be solved or not,” said Tobias Rose-Stockwell. “Journalism must remain grounded in ethical responsibility and context,” said Petra Molnar. “What we need is human judgement, applied critically and ethically, supported by but not replaced by technology.”

Is AI a threat?

Anyone who believes in journalism’s primary mission, to challenge power by investigating the truth, is undoubtedly likely to agree. But is this wishful thinking from a bygone era? James Barrat believes so. He points out that, eventually, we may not have the option to choose. “A scenario that could happen in near future is that AI could become hostile to us,” he said. “AI could take control of our water and our electrical systems. Just recently, a large language model (LLM) agreed that its creator should be killed.”

Barrat mentions an interview he did with the British science fiction writer and futurist Sir Arthur C Clarke, before his death, aged 90, in 2008. Clarke co-wrote the screenplay for 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). Directed by Stanley Kubrick, the Oscar winning film tells the story of an AI-powered computer— aboard the Discovery One spacecraft bound for the planet Jupiter— called HAL. Eventually, HAL experiences a program conflict, malfunctions, and, to defend itself, turns on its human crew members.

Arthur C Clarke told Barrat, “Humans steer the future because we are the most intelligent species on the planet, but when we share the planet with something smarter than us, they will steer the future.”

“AI’s intelligence grows exponentially,” Barrat concludes. “As it gets smarter, we will stop understanding it. We really are inviting disaster.”

The autumn issue of Index magazine, titled Truth, trust and tricksters and published on 26 September, looks at the threats that artificial intelligence poses to freedom of expression

Haiti’s violence is so extreme, it’s difficult to face up to it. But we must.

Haiti has played on my mind for months, not least since reading a piece in the Miami Herald in June about people being beheaded in a church. That level of violence will always make one sit up but what really got to me were the perpetrators. It was not at the hands of the infamous gangs – it was at the hands of so-called self-defence brigades set up to fight the gangs. At the time of reading this I was surprised the story wasn’t more widely covered. I mostly put it down to one simple fact – a challenge we are all too familiar with – distraction by other world events. I’ve now done some digging and it’s more than that.

Today Haiti is facing an intense crisis, or “total chaos” as the UN has described it. They’re led by a coalition set up almost two years ago to offer stability after the former prime minister, Ariel Henry, was ousted. Except the coalition is deemed dysfunctional and useless. A network of gangs control swathes of the country, a main spokesman for the largest being the ominously named Jimmy “Barbecue” Chérizier (Barbecue is in fact simply a reference to his mother’s food stall). The gangs run many of the roads, a convenient way to tax people using them and grow rich in so doing. The country’s main airport, in the capital Port-au-Prince, is effectively closed after several planes were shot at. A patchwork of counter militia have emerged who rival the gangs in violence. Thousands have been killed, millions displaced, starvation is rife, as is rape.

Given the violence, alongside the logistical challenges of getting in and out of the country and travelling internally, international media have largely stayed away. This is a big frustration for Michael Deibert, an author, journalist and Index contributor, who is rare in actually still visiting (and will be writing more in-depth for Index on this). He has been reporting from Haiti for decades and was last there in July. While he recognised the extreme difficulties for foreign correspondents, he did nevertheless stress that they needed to be there. As an aside Deibert also told me that he regularly receives videos of gang atrocities.

Deibert’s point about the absence of foreign media is made all the more important because local journalists are struggling to report the story. They are terrified of both sides – the gangs and militia – and speaking to either in the interests of impartial journalism risks them being deemed a “collaborator”. Meanwhile even seemingly neutral areas to cover, like the reopening of a hospital, have led to the death of several of their own.

The violence isn’t just about silencing the messenger, it’s about the message: A viral video of someone being murdered, the ringing sounds of gunshots in the distance, a woman raped in the open – these make people incredibly cautious about speaking out lest they’re next. The UN might describe the scenes in Haiti as “total chaos” but they’re also ones motivated by total control.

The week in free expression: 12 September – 19 September 2025

Bombarded with news from all angles every day, important stories can easily pass us by. To help you cut through the noise, every Friday Index publishes a weekly news roundup of some of the key stories covering censorship and free expression. This week, we look at threats to cut funding for an Israeli film festival and arrests for projecting photographs onto Windsor Castle.

Israeli film festival faces funding cut threat

Israeli Culture Minister Miki Zohar has threatened to cut funding for the country’s national film awards after its top award was won by a movie about a Palestinian boy.

The Sea, written and directed by Israeli director Shai Carmeli-Pollak, won best film at the Ophir Awards, and automatically became Israel’s entry for the best international feature category at next year’s Oscars.

The movie follows the story of a 12-year-old Palestinian boy who attempts to travel from the West Bank to Tel Aviv to see the sea. It received 13 nominations, winning five.

In a post on X, translated from Hebrew, Zohar said: ‘There is no greater slap in the face of Israeli citizens than the embarrassing and detached annual Ophir Awards ceremony. Starting with the 2026 budget, this pathetic ceremony will no longer be funded by taxpayers’ money. Under my watch, Israeli citizens will not pay from their pockets for a ceremony that spits in the faces of our heroic soldiers’

The news comes during boycotts of the Israeli film industry from across Hollywood, with hundreds of actors, directors and producers taking part. The debate even made its way to the Emmy awards this week, with actors such as Javier Bardem vocalising his support for Palestine.

Trump picture on Windsor Castle leads to four arrests

Protest group Led by Donkeys made the news this week with their protest against a state visit to the UK by US President Donald Trump.

Four members of the group were arrested following the projection of images linking Trump to convicted sex offender Jeffery Epstein.

A spokesperson for the group told the Guardian: “We’ve done, I reckon, 25 or 30 projections since we’ve been going. Often the police come along and we have a chat to them, and they even have a laugh with us and occasionally tell us to not do it. But no one’s ever been arrested before, so it is ridiculous that four of our guys have been arrested for malicious communications.”

The protest group has previously taken over a screen at a Reform UK event, placed a large banner depicting a bombed out Gaza across from the London HQ of the Labour party, an action which led to the arrest of two of the organisation’s founders.

The news comes during a crackdown on freedom of speech in the US this week, with Trump initiating a $15 billion lawsuit against the New York Times for publishing a story linking him to Epstein.

The New York Times responded with the following statement: “This lawsuit has no merit. It lacks any legitimate legal claims and instead is an attempt to stifle and discourage independent reporting. The New York Times will not be deterred by intimidation tactics. We will continue to pursue the facts without fear or favor and stand up for journalists’ First Amendment right to ask questions on behalf of the American people.”

Togo’s former defence minister arrested after criticising government

Marguerite Gnakadé, former defence minister in the West African nation of Togo, has been arrested after calling for the end of dynastic rule in the country.

Gnakadé has been a vocal critic of the government, calling for the resignation of the President, and for the military to stand with the people in ending the government’s rule.

Faure Gnassingbé became President of Togo following the death of his father Gnassingbé Eyadéma in 2005, who had been president since 1967. He continued in this role until he became president of the council of ministers, using constitutional amendments to hold on to power, a move that has been met with protests that left at least five people dead.

Togo has a history of repressing dissenting voices, violent repression of protests, the imprisonment of journalists critical to the regime and the 2024 banning of demonstrations organised by political parties.

Politicians in over 50 countries used ant-LGBTQ+ rhetoric during elections 

A report from Outright International has found that anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric has been used by politicians during elections in 51 out of 61 jurisdictions studied.

The NGO, which promotes LGBTQ+ rights, looked at elections worldwide throughout 2024, a year it describes as a ‘super election year’ in which more than 1.5 billion people were eligible to vote, which the NGO described as a “unique opportunity” to assess inclusion in democracies across the globe.

History was also made in 2024 with the election of Sarah McBride, the first trans person to be elected to the US House of Representatives, set against the backdrop of increasing ant-LGBTQ+ rhetoric from members of the country’s Republican party.

In countries such as Georgia laws have been passed to cut down on freedoms for LGBTQ+ people, with the ruling Georgia Dream party banning same-sex marriages and gender-affirming treatments while promoting “traditional family values”.

Alberto de Belaúnde, a director at Outright International,said: “You talk with a politician from Peru … or Hungary or the UK, you start to see common trends and you realise that it’s a global, coordinated and increasingly well-funded effort to diminish LGBTIQ people.”

Freedoms in flames: Trump’s second term in figures

This article first appeared in Volume 54, Issue 2 of our print edition of Index on Censorship, titled Land of the Free?: Trump’s war on speech at home and abroad, published on 21 July 2025. Read more about the issue here.

Ever since 1933 when Franklin D Roosevelt began to introduce the New Deal in response to the Great Depression, analysts and observers have carefully analysed the first few months of a new political leader’s tenure to gauge their impact. The concept of the “first 100 days” was coined to highlight the whirlwind of executive orders (EOs) and Congressional legislation that Roosevelt unleashed on the American public.

The first few months of President Donald Trump’s second term have certainly been eventful, with huge policy changes both at home and abroad. In this article, we visualise some of the figures that delineate the actions he has taken. If you are viewing the website on a computer, you can hover over the charts to enlarge them.

Trump has been busy flourishing his thick pen and signing a raft of EOs. In the first 100 days, he issued more than any other president on a pro rata basis, even Roosevelt who churned out a total of 1,707 EOs during his first term.

The word cloud above takes the text of Trump’s EOs and analyses it for common themes. We have removed several frequently occurring words that are essentially furniture to the broader themes, such as “department”, “administration” and so on. Trump’s focus on the war on drugs and immigration, and the trade war are hard to miss.

Roosevelt’s first 100 days also saw a flurry of legislation going through Congress. Some 76 pieces of legislation, including 15 major Acts, were passed. Typically, in each two-year period since 1973, Congress has enacted between 20 and 50 pieces of legislation per month. During Trump’s second presidency, Congress has only enacted 36 pieces of legislation in five months, the lowest activity in 50 years. However, just as we went to press, Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) was passed. Omnibus spending bills like the BBB have become more common than traditional legislation as they are immune to the filibuster – a blocking tactic that has increased in use sharply in recent years.

Trump has attacked all of the major pillars of democracy. In the chart below, we see some of the actions he has taken which are challenging legal freedom and freedom of expression around diversity, equity and inclusion.

The freedom of the media to report on Trump's actions has also been challenged since the President took office. Universities are also under attack.

This tsunami of data shows that democracy in the USA is not merely being eroded but rather hacked away with a power drill.

SUPPORT INDEX'S WORK