Cited by 14Journalism and Media StudiesMedia Studies and CommunicationMisinformation and Its Impacts

A Shift Amid the Transition: Towards Smarter, More Resilient Digital Journalism in the Age of AI and Disinformation

Open access
Forja-Pena, Tania, García-Orosa, Berta, López-García, Xosé·2024·Social Sciences

Abstract

Digital journalism is facing a growing number of challenges as the wave of digital transformation enters a new phase. The changes, both slow and sudden, are making it increasingly necessary for there to be a shift amid the transition. The surge of artificial intelligence (AI) in the journalistic world has ushered in what appears to be a new phase for digitalisation and journalism’s role as a producer of factual information and knowledge in society. Current debates suggest that we are at a critical time to reinvent journalism for the new wave of digital transformation. In this stage, which recently began and which some are calling the Fourth Industrial Revolution, both professionals and academics point to the need to make journalism more resilient, so it can adapt to the changes without losing its basic essence, and more people-centred, helping to support individuals in the age of AI. This article analyses the challenges from the perspectives of both academics and professional journalists, based on their codes of ethics. The methodology used is a content analysis of 45 European ethical codes and the Delphi method, involving experts from the journalistic sector and academia. The results highlight that codes of ethics have not kept pace with these professionally and expert-led debates, as few mention new technologies such as artificial intelligence and they tend to focus more on disinformation and social engagement.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/socsci13080403

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is a lack of adequate technological literacy to tackle online disinformation and assist journalists in their jobs of quality reporting.

    “At the same time, they also highlight the lack of adequate technological literacy to tackle online disinformation and assist journalists in their jobs of quality reporting.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Forja-Pena, T., García-Orosa, B., & López-García, X.
Affiliations
  • Universidade de Santiago de Compostela (ES)
  • Department of Communication Sciences, Universidad de Santiago, 15782 Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Corresponding author
Forja-Pena, Tania
Venue
Social Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2024-07-30
Volume
13
Issue
8
Pages
403
ISSN
2076-0760 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4401116252
Cited by
14
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9
FWCI
8.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Hispana (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • MICIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033
  • “ERDF/EU”
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Journalism and Media Studies
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media Studies and Communication
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
Keywords
digital journalism, artificial intelligence in journalism, disinformation, journalistic ethics code, digital transformation, Fourth Industrial Revolution, professional journalists

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review