Dear Readers,
It is no secret that the rise of generative artificial intelligence has reshaped many people’s relationship to their work, both within and outside of universities. The prevalence of LLMs presents new challenges for The Daily as an organization dedicated to journalistic training, informing the public and human creativity.
We as leaders of The Daily have had to ask ourselves fundamental questions about the work we do and its purpose. Based on overwhelming feedback from our newsroom and a review of our organizational mission, we published an official policy last volume mandating that all our work must be produced by humans, for humans.
Our mission statement makes clear that The Daily seeks to provide “its editorial, tech and business staff with unparalleled educational opportunities.” The process of writing or editing an article helps our staff acquire vital critical thinking and communication skills. AI use endangers our staffers’ personal growth by robbing them of opportunities to learn, struggle and discover the full extent of their potential. When it comes to building journalistic skills, there is no substitute for the inevitable frustrations of this process.
Education is not the only reason to limit AI use in writing and editing. Many of us believe the technology subtly encourages dishonesty among staffers.
Our journalism depends on the trust of our audience, who rightly expect us to be transparent about our methods and ethical standards. A comparison to academic work makes this logic clear. Submitting a paper written by AI under one’s own name violates the trust between a student and their instructor. In the same way, fraudulently publishing sentences written by AI erodes the relationship between a newsroom and its audience.
Relying on AI could also limit the reporting that our staffers imagine they are capable of.
Much of the best journalism we produce draws from on-the-ground reporting or, in the case of op-eds and essays, lived experience. With exceptions, articles based exclusively on internet-based information and thinking rarely produce surprising insights. We seek to encourage the practice of real-world journalism among our staff.
This policy should be taken as a starting point rather than the end of the conversation about AI and The Daily. LLMs will likely continue to develop new capabilities, raising new questions for future generations. New standards around AI use could also develop in the professional journalism world. Future Daily staffers will have to determine for themselves how to take cues from other organizations.
What must not change, however, is The Daily’s fundamental commitment to human writing, reporting and creation.
Sincerely,
George Porteous ‘’27
Amina Wase ’26
Anna Yang ’27
Vol. 269 Leadership