Bite Size Comms

Public relations practitioners appear to have embraced artificial intelligence with considerable enthusiasm, but a striking new report shows their journalistic counterparts are much more sceptical about the technology’s potential to reshape both fields. The Reuters Institute’s comprehensive survey of over 1,000 UK journalists, published in November 2025, offers a sobering contrast to PR’s AI adoption and underscores important lessons for communicators.

Enthusiasm versus scepticism

Three-quarters of PR professionals now use generative AI in their work, according to Muck Rack research, nearly tripling adoption rates since March 2023. Most view the technology positively: 90% believe AI enables them to work more efficiently, whilst around 80% report it enhances the quality of their outputs. In stark contrast, 62% of UK journalists perceive AI as a major or very major threat to journalism, whereas only 15% view it as a significant opportunity. This pessimism extends across all demographics, although senior journalists and frequent AI users exhibit somewhat less concern.

The divergence in attitudes likely stems from how each profession perceives AI’s impact on their work. PR practitioners report time savings and efficiency gains, whilst journalists who use AI most often report spending excessive time on repetitive tasks. Instead of freeing journalists from mundane duties, AI appears to impose new administrative burdens, including data cleaning, prompt creation, and verification of AI-generated content.

However, I believe that PR practitioners in the Muck Rack study are overly optimistic. Using AI occasionally differs from integrating the technology into daily workflows.

Different tools for different tasks

The tasks each profession prioritises reveal fundamentally different approaches to AI integration. PR practitioners mainly use AI for creative and strategic purposes: 82% for brainstorming and idea generation, 72% for drafting initial versions, and 70% for editing and refining content. Research, social media content creation, press releases, and media pitches are prominently featured in PR’s AI toolkit.

UK journalists, on the other hand, focus AI use on language-related tasks. Transcription accounts for 49% of monthly usage, followed by translation at 33% and copy-editing at 30%. More complex journalistic tasks are less widely adopted: only 10% of journalists use AI to generate first drafts each month, whereas fact-checking and idea generation remain below 16%. Audio and video generation are marginal, at 4% and 2% respectively.

Shared concerns, different priorities

Both professions grapple with the ethical implications of AI, although their specific concerns differ. Journalists express significant anxiety about AI’s impact on public trust (83% strongly concerned) and accuracy (81%). These worries highlight journalism’s core values of credibility and verification, which generative AI’s tendency for “hallucinations” directly threatens.

PR professionals view talent development as their primary concern, with 75% concerned that younger specialists may become overly reliant on AI without developing essential communication skills. Privacy, plagiarism, and output quality are also significant factors. Yet, these concerns have not diminished enthusiasm: 76% of communicators are confident in their organisation’s ability to use AI effectively.

The training gap

Both sectors face challenges due to inadequate training and guidance. Only 32% of journalists receive AI training from their employers, while 55% of PR professionals report that their organisations lack AI use policies altogether. Agencies slightly outperform in-house teams, with 43% providing training compared to 31%. This gap between adoption and preparation creates serious risks for both fields.

Lessons for PR practitioners

The Reuters Institute’s findings offer valuable insights for UK PR professionals. Journalists’ experiences suggest that AI integration requires careful management to avoid imposing additional administrative burdens while genuinely enhancing creative work. Their strong concerns about accuracy and trust underscore the reputational risks of overreliance on AI-generated content, which is especially relevant for PR practitioners whose credibility depends on journalists’ trust.

As AI becomes further embedded in communication workflows, PR professionals should balance their enthusiasm with journalists’ caution. The technology’s efficiency gains are real, but so are the risks to quality, accuracy, and professional development that worry our media colleagues.

[Image of multicoloured abstract curves by vackground.com on Unsplash]