The machine won’t replace you. The journalist who uses it will

THE HANOI TIMES — In March 2024, a group of Vietnamese journalists took part in a specialized training program in India on the application of artificial intelligence in journalism.

Organized by the Government of India under the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation Programme (ITEC), the course exposed participants to AI-assisted workflows, ethical case studies, and digital newsroom simulations. For many, it was more than just professional development but a turning point in how they viewed the future of their craft.

Vo Thu Trang, a reporter for Khanh Hoa Radio and Television, recalled how she initially felt overwhelmed by the pace of change. But after using AI-powered tools during the course, her perspective shifted. She realized that instead of fighting the tide, she needed to learn how to navigate it. "I'm no longer afraid of being left behind," she said.

Ngo Thi Thuan Hai of Vinh Long Television had a similar realization. She saw AI not as a threat, but as an essential component to remaining both efficient and creative in a modern newsroom.

These personal accounts reflect a larger truth about the profession. Journalism today is no longer about speed. It is not about how many words a reporter can produce or how quickly a story can be filed, but who can understand the systems that determine whether a story is read, shared, or buried. More importantly, it's about who maintains editorial control in an environment where algorithms increasingly shape the public conversation.

The challenges facing journalism are not just technological but institutional. According to Dr. Nguyen Quang Dong, Director of the Institute for Policy Studies and Media Development, a recent survey found that 85% of media executives in Vietnam have begun using data analytics to study audience behavior.

Yet only 34% of journalists use such tools in their daily work. This disconnect creates a gap in understanding and strategy. While leadership sets the direction through dashboards and audience metrics, reporters remain disconnected from how their content is performing, often relying solely on instinct and experience.

The consequences of this divide are real. Stories can be well written but miss their audience. Misinformation can spread faster than verified reporting. Newsrooms risk becoming disjointed operations, with editorial and digital teams speaking different languages.

Artificial intelligence has many practical benefits. It can generate headlines, create summaries, and highlight content trends. But it cannot understand political nuance. It cannot navigate sensitive issues such as religion, history, or national sovereignty. It does not comprehend the boundaries of public communication set by Vietnam's political and media institutions. Nor can it distinguish when the publication of a particular detail may be harmful, inappropriate, or politically damaging.

The danger lies not in what AI cannot do, but in the absence of human oversight. Left unchecked, these systems can go too far. They may frame stories in unintended ways or push content that violates journalistic responsibility. In a country where information management is both a political and ethical issue, this can have far-reaching consequences.

That is why journalists must remain at the center of the editorial process. They are not just content creators. They are decision-makers who know when AI-generated language sounds wrong, when a headline misrepresents a situation, or when a photo should not be published out of respect. They need to be able to use AI for research or data cleaning, but never cede their judgment to it.

In today's newsroom, a journalist needs to be fluent in two languages. One is the language of platforms, metrics, and automation. The other is the language of people, ethics, and public trust. They must understand how search engines rank stories, when to resist the pull of trends in favor of what matters, and write to reach people with purpose.

Technology does not reduce the pressure on journalists; it compounds it. If AI makes mistakes or offends public sentiment, it cannot be held accountable. The burden still falls on the journalist to explain, correct, and take responsibility. To meet this challenge, today's reporters must do more than write. They must understand data, navigate platforms, collaborate across disciplines, and adapt quickly. Above all, they must exercise judgment, because no technical skill can replace integrity.

The greatest threat to journalism is not automation, but complacency. Newsrooms that rely on machines without investing in human judgment may produce more content but earn less trust. Machines do not investigate, challenge power, or ask tough questions with empathy. They cannot replace journalists, but journalists who fail to adapt will be replaced by those who do.

The future belongs to those who master technology with integrity and purpose.