Most newsrooms aren't struggling because they lack technology. They're struggling to decide what to hold on to, what to change, and what to let go of.

In the last edition, I outlined a fresh approach to building newsrooms that's not chained to legacy systems, but guided by three questions: What would we keep human? What can we automate? And what do we drop altogether?

That conversation came out of a session we ran at the recent Africa Media Festival in Nairobi.

What struck me was how quickly it moved away from tools.

It became less about what AI can do, and more about what journalism actually is.

One idea kept coming up: AI should be the assistant, not the author.

To make that real, we came up with a simple framework which I shared in the previous edition:

R.A.V. — Research, Augmentation, Verification.

But frameworks only matter if they can translate into how work actually gets done.

So what does this look like in practice?

One of the clearest ideas that emerged was that AI belongs in the background — in the systems that support journalism and not at the centre of editorial decisions.

When you think about it, a lot of what slows newsrooms down today isn't journalism itself. It's everything around it.

Transcribing interviews. Translating content. Working through long reports or court filings. Tracking patterns across data. Adapting the same story for different platforms. Audience engagement.

That's where AI is already proving useful in newsrooms.

In the newsroom we'd build today, much of this becomes automated. We'd have interviews transcribed in real time, stories translated and tailored for diverse audiences, data systems scanning patterns and early signals you'd otherwise spend hours finding. And content repurposed for social, web, and audio, without starting over each time.

None of this replaces journalists. It just clears the clutter, leaving them to focus on what needs human judgment.

With AI sitting in the background, journalism remains with the people, because it's about editorial judgement — deciding what stories matter, whose voices get heard, what context is essential, and where ethical boundaries lie. These are profoundly human decisions that set professional journalism apart from online AI-generated noise.

In our ideal newsroom, that line is clear: every story is signed off by a human editor who takes responsibility for it. Reporting, interviews and relationship-building remain in human hands. So does any coverage of sensitive or complex stories that require human judgment. Journalists set the angle, the context, the "why now?"

AI can help you get the information faster, but it cannot decide what that information means. That responsibility still belongs to journalists.

What became clear in Nairobi is that the biggest barriers to transformation are often not technological, but cultural.

Many newsrooms are still held back by habits they haven't been willing to let go of. One story still gets pushed across every platform. The tendency to publish and move on, rather than iterating as events unfold. Teams still work in silos — editorial, product, tech, audience, marketing — even as the work becomes more interconnected.

There is also a deeper mindset challenge. Audiences are still treated as passive, even though they've long moved on from that, often with a reluctance to meet them where they are. Speed often takes priority over accuracy. Decisions are made on instinct alone, even when there's data available to inform them. And experimentation is avoided due to hesitation, or because leadership isn't creating the space for it.

In many cases, there is a lack of clarity. We chase trends without a clear strategy, and often treat change as something happening to us, rather than something we can actively shape. And some ways of working continue simply because "that's how it's always been." It's these habits we haven't been willing to change that tend to slow transformation.

Put this together, and the newsroom starts to look different. It's not fully automated, and it's not stuck in the past either. It's something in between.

A hybrid way of working, where technology supports the process, but responsibility stays with people.

A typical workflow in this hybrid model might look like this: AI scans large volumes of information and surfaces signals. Journalists investigate, report, and build the story. Drafts are developed with AI support, but shaped by human judgment. Verification is led by editors, with AI assisting in cross-checking. Final publication remains a human decision, with clear accountability.

The technology supports the process, but the editorial responsibility never shifts away from the journalist.

What stood out from the discussions was that the modern newsroom will be shaped by decisions we make, rather than by tools alone: where to draw the line between people and machines, which old habits to drop, and how carefully we build the systems we want to work with.

The real danger isn't that AI replaces journalism, but that we adopt it without really thinking through where it belongs and what role journalism itself should play.

This isn't a question for later. It's one newsroom leaders need to answer now:

Where should AI sit in our workflow? What are our non-negotiables? What do we need to stop doing?

Whether you're asking these questions or not, every newsroom is already designing its future through the choices it makes and the ones it avoids.

Call for Proposals - AIJC (Nairobi)

the African Investigative Journalism Conference returns in 2026 for its 22nd year, this time in Nairobi, at the Aga Khan Graduate School of Media and Communications — the first time it will not be held at Wits University in Johannesburg. AIJC is inviting speaker, panel, and training proposals.

Details here

Deadline:Apply by April 5

INMA Africa Elevate Scholarship 2026 — International News Media Association

A strong opportunity for early-career professionals in African newsrooms interested in innovation and the business of journalism. The programme offers mentorship, masterclasses, and networking, covering areas like digital transformation, AI in newsrooms, audience growth, and product strategy.

Open to applicants under 35, with less than five years’ experience, currently working in a news media organisation. Limited to 50 participants.

Details here

Deadline - 17th April 2026

Biodiversity Media Grants 2026

Grants of €10,000–€12,000 available for media organisations in low- and middle-income countries to strengthen reporting on biodiversity. Open to projects including investigative and data-driven reporting, cross-border collaborations, journalist training, and storytelling or fact-checking tools. Kenya and Uganda are eligible.

Apply Now

Deadline: March 28th

We work with media organisations to turn big ideas into real impact — integrating AI, navigating digital shifts, and rethinking editorial strategy for the future. Curious about what that could look like for you? Let’s connect. Send me an email.