Resonates’ team sheds light on journalists’ opinions on AI-written copy, and how you can ensure your communications get noticed.
For better or worse, AI has changed the way people and companies produce content. Naturally, the volume and quality of what journalists receive is both increasing and eroding, causing more and more to simply say ‘no’ to AI-written copy.
The public isn’t so happy with the idea of AI-created articles, either. YouGov data shows nearly three-quarters of people would be less likely to read an article if they knew it was written in part or whole by an AI.
To shed more light on the matter, I asked our team to share their insights and their first-hand experience with journalists navigating this frankly momentous change.
“I don’t think editors are necessarily rejecting AI itself, but the lack of judgment that often comes with it. And that absence can cause a lack of originality or relevance.
“AI-generated press releases can be technically sound, but often uninteresting and unrelated to what’s happening in the wider world. In my opinion, AI-generated thought leadership content simply isn’t – without thoughts from a human it appears and feels hollow, generic and will be disconnected from the interests of the newsroom and its audience. When journalists receive content like that, I’m sure their eyes glaze over and they quickly switch off, resulting in your company or announcement going unnoticed.
“We’re seeing journalist enquiries stating, ‘no AI-generated content response please’ and honestly, I’m glad. Of course I’m biased, but our content team are brilliant – there is no replacing the human-centric sense of hunting out a good news hook for me, I’m afraid.”
“The hyperbolic chat and flattery of AI is becoming increasingly well known – so much so that AI companies are using it to slate their competitors. Nuance isn’t something that comes easily to a system prompted generically.
“That doesn’t just mean that fully-AI-written content is bland, but that it gives an unrealistic impression by overtalking and trying to create an illusion of completeness. That superficially confident form of writing is a quick turn off for journalists who spend their time trying to uncover gaps in a story, filling them with new research and angles.”
“When it comes to AI, the practical lesson for anyone doing media relations is precisely that: relations.
“Building relationships is an inherently human task, and relying primarily on artificial intelligence to get your content noticed is a quick way to destroy a relationship. Instead, being a genuine resource to a time-pressed, inbox-overflowed journalist with relevant, newsworthy stories is key.
“Some journalists have AI-filters to block AI-content as spam. Others use their trust filter; they’ll respond to those they trust will bring them something useful. At the end of the day, if you want a journalist to take the time to read your story, you have to take the time to write it, and pitch it too!”
“The reality of the internet is that you can now find information to support almost any point of view. It’s why we’re seeing decision makers increasingly relying on credible publications to identify what information and sources are valuable – and journalists and publishers are obviously keen to ensure everything they publish supports this.
“Content that is AI-generated – or overly AI-influenced – simply doesn’t meet the threshold required by the publications your audiences trust. The way generative AI works mean you can’t be sure of any of the ‘facts’ or claims that a platform produces, and although generated articles appear flowing, even a cursory check usually shows that there is rarely any real substance beneath the alliteration and flowery metaphors.”
“I don’t think the conversation should be framed as a wholesale rejection of AI content. Many journalists use AI in their work – it’s a valuable tool, and rejecting it is to miss the point.
“It’s a matter of assistance versus authorship, and finding the line – or balance – between the two. I’d say that journalists are happy with AI-assisted content provided the end result is better for it. On LinkedIn you can find lots of journalists talking about how they’re using AI to increase productivity and quality. They’re also discussing the obvious giveaways when it’s been used without skill.”
“Journalists’ inboxes are already overwhelmed, so filling them up with more AI-written copy isn’t doing them any help. What you save in time, you’re spending in trust. And ultimately, that’s going to cost you more in the long run. In a marketplace of automated pitches, working with the right PR agency is a sound investment – especially now credibility matters so much.”
When it comes to producing copy and pitching to journalists, here’s what you need to keep in mind:
As AI fills the internet with more content, it’s also making standout PR more powerful. When you invest in quality, consistency, and real relationships with journalists, your copy, company and technology get noticed and remembered.
Good PR helps you earn attention, build trust, and put your story in front of the journalists gatekeeping our public discourse.
If you want support getting noticed, get in touch.
