Journalist Rejects AI-Generated Content in Newsrooms

Writer Mic Wright vows to never use AI to compose his newsletter, citing concerns over authenticity and the devaluation of human creativity.

Published on Feb. 18, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

In this edition of his newsletter, Mic Wright strongly condemns the use of AI-generated content in journalism, arguing that it represents a betrayal of readers and a devaluation of the craft of writing. He cites an op-ed by Cleveland.com editor Chris Quinn, who praised the use of AI to free up reporters' time, as an example of the troubling trend towards AI-powered newsrooms. Wright asserts that writing is an essential part of the reporting process and cannot be outsourced to machines without compromising the integrity of journalism.

Why it matters

The debate over the use of AI in journalism highlights broader concerns about the role of technology in shaping the media landscape. As news organizations increasingly turn to AI to streamline operations and cut costs, there are fears that the authenticity and quality of journalism will suffer, potentially leading to a further erosion of public trust in the media.

The details

Wright argues that using AI to generate news content is the "intellectual equivalent of pink slime" and shows "contempt for their readers and very little respect for themselves" on the part of journalists who embrace the technology. He criticizes Quinn's claim that AI frees up reporters' time, stating that "writing is thinking" and that removing the writing process from reporting is "perverse." Wright believes that readers can easily distinguish between genuine human-written stories and the "generic slop" produced by generative AI, and that news organizations that rely on AI are doing so to cut costs rather than serve their audience.

  • This newsletter is the 1030th edition published by Mic Wright.
  • The op-ed by Cleveland.com editor Chris Quinn that prompted this response was published recently.

The players

Mic Wright

The author of this newsletter, who has vowed to never use AI to compose his writing.

Chris Quinn

The editor of Cleveland.com and The Cleveland Plain Dealer, who praised the use of AI in newsrooms in a recent op-ed.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Writing is thinking. I don't want to outsource that to an autocorrect machine with notions. Generative AI produces the intellectual equivalent of pink slime; mechanically reclaimed chicken shaped into breaded nuggets.”

— Mic Wright (substack.com)

“Artificial intelligence is not bad for newsrooms. It's the future of them. It already allows us to be faster, more thorough and more comprehensible. It frees time for what matters most: gathering facts and developing stories to serve you.”

— Chris Quinn, Editor, Cleveland.com and The Cleveland Plain Dealer (substack.com)

The takeaway

This debate over the use of AI in journalism highlights the broader tension between technological progress and the preservation of human creativity and authenticity. As news organizations continue to explore the potential of AI, it will be crucial for journalists and readers alike to remain vigilant in defending the integrity of the written word and the essential role of human storytelling in the media.