Study on AI and work in the media sector: journalists want more training
In September 2025, the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) published its position on the use of artificial intelligence in newsrooms. The EFJ is now releasing the results of a study carried out with its partners at FIA, FIM and UNI MEI, as part of the “Atypical Work IV” project, funded by the European Commission. Although they generally view AI as an opportunity, journalists are concerned about the ethical issues surrounding its use. They would like to have access to more training programmes and workshops on the use of AI in journalism.
This new report on AI and work in the media, arts & entertainment sector in Europe was produced as a result of the Atypical Work IV project involving the EFJ, the International Federation of Actors (FIA), the International Federation of Musicians (FIM) and UNI-MEI. It was based on a large scale survey of the European members of the four federations, as well as the national level members of a small number of hand-picked unions across the four worker cohorts of actors, musicians, crew and journalists. It was authored by Belgian Arts Consultancy TWIIID.
The surveys aimed to capture a snapshot of how AI is being felt in the working lives of those active in the Media, Arts and Entertainment sector. It examines what uses and applications are most prevalent and how they are perceived. It explores how workers rate their skills needs and workload in relation to fast changing uses of AI. It teases out concerns of AI impact on creative work specifically. It also explores how those active in the sector believe the use of AI in the workplace should be framed in terms of safeguards, remuneration, collective bargaining policy making, etc.
As is stated in the introduction “these reports do not claim to provide a final or exhaustive account. AI is developing rapidly, and the perceptions captured here reflect a specific moment at the end of 2025. What we hope they do provide is a robust, evidence-based foundation, grounded in the voices of workers and their representative organisations, for the collective bargaining strategies, policy responses and social dialogue that the sector urgently needs.”
The survey findings make clear that journalists already make extensive use of AI, particularly for AI-generated transcriptions and summaries of interviews or recordings (76%) and for the automatic translation and subtitling to improve the accessibility and reach of journalistic works (76%). However, the study also highlights the ethical concerns associated with the use of AI: “Journalism’s concern profile is dominated by the public-trust axis. Deepfakes/misinformation (93.5%) is the defining peak, closely followed by misuse of AI-generated content (90.3%) and ethical concerns around automated reporting (90.3%). This indicates journalists see AI as a threat to verification, legitimacy, and accountability. These are risks that extend beyond the newsroom to audiences and democratic discourse”.
While most of the journalists surveyed are mainly looking for information, the journalists would like to go one step further and receive training or workshops on AI tools (64.5%).
30 journalists’ unions from 19 European countries also took part in the survey. These EFJ affiliates see most AI tools as clear opportunities but become much more cautious when tools approach automated content production or distribution control. Journalists’ unions report consistently high levels of concern about AI across all surveyed risk areas. The highest “very concerned” scores cluster around intellectual property rights (60%), deepfakes and misinformation (60%), and misuse of AI‑generated content (52%), indicating that unions see AI as a direct threat to authors’ rights, information integrity, and control over how journalistic material is used. Remuneration and working conditions also rank very highly (72% concerned or very concerned, as do transparency and attribution of sources, job loss and automation, quality degradation, and AI’s impact on unions and contract negotiations.
In open answers, the journalists’ unions express a strong sense of anxiety and unpreparedness regarding the impact of AI on their profession. The main concerns revolve around the absence of strategy or regulation, threats to authors’ rights, and the deterioration of journalistic quality and autonomy. A recurrent theme is that the media sector is reacting without overall direction or policy: “There is no strategy or workflow regarding AI, only ad hoc press statements and going with the flow type of thinking.” Respondents stress that decisionmakers underestimate the urgency of AI literacy among journalists and audiences, while misinformation and deepfakes spread rapidly.
Unions also tie AI to the ongoing economic decline in journalism and the dominance of platforms. A further, shared concern is the impact on quality, ethics, and creative independence: “The growing reliance on AI tools in news production has led to faster but often shallower content, with less context and fewer verified sources”.
Journalists’ unions express very broad and intense support needs around AI, centred on information, legal tools and bargaining capacity. Almost all (87.5%) want clear, accessible information on how AI is used in the media sector, and the same percentage (87.5%) requests legal guidance on copyright, data use and algorithmic transparency. Large majorities call for collective bargaining frameworks (75%), sector‑specific impact studies (66.7%), model contract clauses (62.5%), monitoring tools (70.8%), training programmes (75%) and resources for ethical guidelines and human oversight (62.5%), while over half seek dialogue platforms with employers/tech providers (54.2%), funding for union‑led AI innovation (70.8%), and support to engage in EU or international policy‑making (66.7%).
The reports are available to download in:
English: 1-FIA, 2-UNI MEI, 3-EFJ, 4-FIM
French: 1-FIA, 2-UNI MEI, 3-EFJ, 4-FIM
Spanish: 1-FIA, 2-UNI MEI, 3-EFJ, 4-FIM
