A.I. will never replace the heart of a journalist

When I first heard the term “artificial intelligence,” my thoughts immediately turned to The Terminator. I pictured a cold, calculated machine taking over the world, reducing humanity to a footnote in its data stream. 

It’s a dramatic image, sure—but one that stuck with me. Fast forward to today, and I find myself working in a profession where AI is no longer science fiction. It’s here, integrated into the day-to-day operations of newspapers across the globe.

In our industry, AI has become a surprisingly helpful assistant. It transcribes interviews in minutes, flags grammatical errors, suggests stronger headlines, and even helps sort through data for investigative pieces. For routine tasks like formatting press releases or compiling box scores, AI can save valuable time. 

It also helps us track reader engagement—showing which stories are being read, when they’re read, and even how long someone lingers on a paragraph. In a profession where time and staffing are increasingly limited, tools like this can make a real difference.

But let’s be clear—AI is a tool, not a storyteller.

A machine can rearrange sentences and correct punctuation, but it can’t feel the tension in a courtroom when a verdict is read. It won’t understand the emotions behind a family’s grief after a tragic loss or the pride of a community rallying behind a hometown hero. Those are the things that give stories their soul, and no algorithm can replicate that. It takes a human to walk into those moments, to ask sensitive questions, and to capture the heartbeat of real life.

Photography is no different. AI might help enhance an image or sort through thousands of photos, but it can’t sense when to click the shutter during a meaningful embrace, or decide when to lower the camera out of respect. 

Those decisions are made by people with empathy—by photographers who understand that some moments are more powerful felt than seen.

At its best, journalism is about connection. It’s about listening, observing, and translating life into words and images that resonate. No matter how advanced AI becomes, it will never replace the compassion, instinct, and lived experience that a human brings to the story.

Still, I’m not anti-AI. I believe it has a role in modern journalism—one of support, not substitution. It can help us work faster and smarter, but it will never replace the trust we build with our sources, the judgment we use in editing sensitive material, or the courage it sometimes takes to ask the uncomfortable questions.

The stories that matter—the ones that touch hearts, inform minds, and bring communities together—will always require a human touch. AI may be able to assist us, but it will never feel for us. And in journalism, feeling is everything.