expand_moreexpand_lessexpand_moreexpand_less
|
 |
Pete PachalCoinDesk |
Google’s new AI ad formats could weaken publisher traffic, but they also reveal why credible media still matters.
The fight for attention is shifting from clicks to citations, and that could reward better journalism—if bots can find it.
A shadow industry of data middlemen is turning publishers’ work into fuel for AI agents—and forcing media companies to rethink what “outputs”...
The Emily Hart case shows the gap between what platforms say about AI transparency and what users actually see in their feeds.
The promise of ‘liquid content’ is that every story can become video, audio, or something else. But do audiences want it?
Most readers start looking for information with AI. Publishers need a new audience map to meet them where they are.
As more journalists experiment with AI tools, a high-profile misstep shows how easily trust can break down.
The rise of AI agents could automate much of newsroom operations, leaving human journalists to focus on taste, judgment, and trust.
AI is reshaping search, but it hasn’t erased the value of reporting. The real opportunity may lie in what publishers do after the story breaks.
In the AI era, the winners won’t be the publishers with the most clicks. They’ll be the ones that give audiences something algorithms can’t replace.
After years of fragmented pushback, publishers are beginning to organize around a simple goal—making AI companies pay for access.
Agentic AI is creating a divide between builders who shape how work happens and users who must adapt to it.
If bots can reliably draft copy, ‘something big’ might be happening to the job of a journalist.
All the mainstream attention on AI is creating pressure for journalists to increase their output. Here’s what they should do instead.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
