When Reporters Get Hands-on with Robo-Writing

TLDR

Automated journalism is becoming more common thanks to abundant data feeds, growing demand for news on digital devices, and advances in algorithms. This article expands the literature by examining professional journalists’ experiences with and opinions about robo‑writing technology. The study surveyed journalists from the BBC, CNN, and Thomson Reuters who had first‑hand experience using robo‑writing software from a leading technology supplier. Journalists identify limitations in source reliability and the “nose for news” of automation, yet expect it to become more widespread, enhancing the depth, breadth, specificity, and immediacy of reporting while raising ethical concerns and reinforcing the need for human judgment, curiosity, and skepticism.

Abstract

The availability of data feeds, the demand for news on digital devices, and advances in algorithms are helping to make automated journalism more prevalent. This article extends the literature on the subject by analysing professional journalists' experiences with, and opinions about, the technology. Uniquely, the participants were drawn from a range of news organizations—including the BBC, CNN, and Thomson Reuters—and had first-hand experience working with robo-writing software provided by one of the leading technology suppliers. The results reveal journalists' judgements on the limitations of automation, including the nature of its sources and the sensitivity of its "nose for news". Nonetheless, journalists believe that automated journalism will become more common, increasing the depth, breadth, specificity, and immediacy of information available. While some news organizations and consumers may benefit, such changes raise ethical and societal issues and, counter-intuitively perhaps, may increase the need for skills—news judgement, curiosity, and scepticism—that human journalists embody.