Futureproof
Menu

US dataswitch to UK

News Analysts, Reporters, and Journalists

writing commentaries, columns or scripts, using computers, establishing and maintaining relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information and reporting news stories for publication or broadcast. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

This job is splitting in two: revising work to meet editorial approval or to fit time or space requirements is work AI now does quickly and cheaply, and establishing and maintaining relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information is work it can't touch.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Which half fills your week decides your exposure. The ledger below shows which rows you can move toward.

Your week, as this page understands it

Narrate or write news stories, reviews, or commentary for print, broadcast, or other communications media such as newspapers, magazines, radio, or television. May collect and analyze information through interview, investigation, or observation. The job title says “news analysts”, “reporters” or “journalists”: officially one job, several names. The real job is the part underneath: establishing and maintaining relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information. That is the thing someone has to be right about.

The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But news analysts, reporters, and journalists is not one task. It is 30 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is establishing and maintaining relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI
52%
changing shape
11%
staying human
36%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

Whole-job exposure score 51 out of 100 (46–57 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, across 30 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.

How we know this

What is measured: Every published task statement for news analysts, reporters, and journalists is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

Shifting to AI

15 tasks

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

  • Receiving assignments or evaluating leads or tips to develop story ideas

    This is reading one thing and writing another: assignments in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Receive assignments or evaluate leads or tips to develop story ideas.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Sifting tips and leads into workable story ideas is largely a reading and sorting job.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Analyzing and interpreting news and information received from various sources to broadcast the information

    This is reading one thing and writing another: news in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Analyze and interpret news and information received from various sources to broadcast the information.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (76–90 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Pulling together and explaining information from many sources is a core strength of current tools.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

  • Researching a story's background information to provide complete and accurate information

    This is reading one thing and writing another: a story's background information in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Research a story's background information to provide complete and accurate information.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Background research on a story is fast, well-documented work for software, though facts must be checked.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

  • Examining news items of local

    This is reading one thing and writing another: news items of local in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Examine news items of local, national, and international significance to determine topics to address, or obtain assignments from editorial staff members.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 70 out of 100 (63–77 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Scanning the day's news to pick topics is a sorting job software does quickly.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

Changing shape

3 tasks

Tasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.

  • Arranging interviews with people who can provide information about a story

    The software now makes the first pass at interviews, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Arrange interviews with people who can provide information about a story.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Requests and scheduling can be automated, but persuading a reluctant source to talk takes a person.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Reporting news stories for publication or broadcast

    The software now makes the first pass at news stories, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Report news stories for publication or broadcast, describing the background and details of events.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Writing up a story from gathered facts is well within reach, though being at events is not.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Reporting on specialized fields, medicine, green technology, environmental issues, science, politics, sports, arts, consumer affairs, business, religion, crime or education

    The software now makes the first pass at specialized fields, medicine, green technology, environmental issues, science, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Report on specialized fields such as medicine, green technology, environmental issues, science, politics, sports, arts, consumer affairs, business, religion, crime, or education.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Specialist rounds involve plenty of documented material, though contacts and field reporting still need a person.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

Staying human

12 tasks

Tasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.

  • Establishing and maintaining relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information

    This work happens in the physical world: relationships, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Establish and maintain relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (1–9 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Sources talk to reporters they trust, and that relationship is the work itself.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Gathering information and developing perspectives about news subjects through research

    This work happens in the physical world: information, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Gather information and develop perspectives about news subjects through research, interviews, observation, and experience.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Research can be automated, but interviews, being at the scene and forming a view are done by a reporter.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Investigating breaking news developments, such as disasters, crimes or human-interest stories

    This work happens in the physical world: news developments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Investigate breaking news developments, such as disasters, crimes, or human-interest stories.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Covering a breaking disaster or crime means getting to the scene and getting people to talk.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

Show the other 20 tasks

  • Revising work to meet editorial approval or to fit time or space requirements

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: work in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Revise work to meet editorial approval or to fit time or space requirements.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (89–97 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Trimming and reshaping copy to fit space or an editor's brief is routine editing software does well.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Writing commentaries, columns or scripts, using computers

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: commentaries, columns or scripts in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Write commentaries, columns, or scripts, using computers.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (76–90 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Columns and scripts can be drafted to a publishable standard, with an editor shaping voice and angle.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

  • Selecting material most pertinent

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: material most pertinent in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Select material most pertinent to presentation, and organize this material into appropriate formats.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (76–90 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Picking the strongest material and shaping it into a format is something software does well.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

  • Reviewing written, audio or video copy and correct errors in content, grammar or punctuation

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: written, audio or video copy and correct errors in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Review written, audio, or video copy, and correct errors in content, grammar, or punctuation, following prescribed editorial style and formatting guidelines.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (76–90 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Grammar and style corrections are easy for software; catching factual errors still needs a knowledgeable editor.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

  • Determining a published or broadcasted story's emphasis

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: a published or broadcasted story's emphasis in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Determine a published or broadcasted story's emphasis, length, and format, organizing material accordingly.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (76–90 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Deciding a story's length, format and emphasis follows editorial patterns software can apply.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

  • Checking reference materials, such as books, news files or public records, to obtain relevant facts

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: reference materials in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Check reference materials, such as books, news files, or public records, to obtain relevant facts.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (76–90 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Looking up facts in records and reference files is fast for software, but every reference needs verifying.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

  • Writing online blog entries that address news developments or offer additional information

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: online blog entries in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 3 · Core
    Source: “Write online blog entries that address news developments or offer additional information, opinions, or commentary on news events.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (76–90 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Short blog updates on news developments can be drafted to publishable quality quickly.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

  • Writing columns, editorials, commentaries or reviews that interpret events or offer opinions

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: columns, editorials, commentaries or reviews in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 3 · Core
    Source: “Write columns, editorials, commentaries, or reviews that interpret events or offer opinions.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (76–90 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Opinion pieces can be drafted well, but a recognizable point of view comes from the writer.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

  • Reviewing and evaluating notes taken about news events to isolate pertinent facts and details

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: notes taken in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Review and evaluate notes taken about news events to isolate pertinent facts and details.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Pulling the important facts out of a pile of notes is close to summarising, which software does well.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Developing ideas or material for columns or commentaries by analyzing and interpreting news

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: ideas in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Develop ideas or material for columns or commentaries by analyzing and interpreting news, current issues, or personal experiences.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Turning current events into column ideas suits software well, though a distinctive voice is the writer's.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Communicating with readers, viewers, advertisers or the general public via mail, email or telephone

    shifting to AI

    This is reading one thing and writing another: readers, viewers in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 3 · Core
    Source: “Communicate with readers, viewers, advertisers, or the general public via mail, email, or telephone.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (60–68 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Replying to readers and viewers by mail, email or phone is largely routine correspondence.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Assigning stories to other reporters or duties to production staff

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles stories and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 3 · Core
    Source: “Assign stories to other reporters or duties to production staff.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Assigning stories fairly depends on knowing the team and what each reporter can handle.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Taking pictures or video and processing them for inclusion in a story

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: pictures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Take pictures or video, and process them for inclusion in a story.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (7–21 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Editing images can be automated, but taking them means being at the event.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Transmiting news stories or reporting information from remote locations

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: news stories, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Transmit news stories or reporting information from remote locations, using equipment such as satellite phones, telephones, fax machines, or modems.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (9–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Sending copy from a remote location means someone is there with the equipment.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Discussing issues with editors to establish priorities or positions

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles issues and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Discuss issues with editors to establish priorities or positions.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (9–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Agreeing priorities and positions with an editor is a judgment conversation between colleagues.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Conducting taped or filmed interviews or narratives

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: taped, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Conduct taped or filmed interviews or narratives.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: A filmed interview works because a person is asking and reacting in real time.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Coordinating and serving as an anchor on news broadcast programs

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: an anchor, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Core
    Source: “Coordinate and serve as an anchor on news broadcast programs.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Anchoring a broadcast means a person in the studio whom viewers recognize and trust.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Presenting news stories and introduce in-depth videotaped segments or live transmissions from on-the-scene reporters

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: news stories, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Present news stories, and introduce in-depth videotaped segments or live transmissions from on-the-scene reporters.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Presenting on air means a person in front of the camera whom the audience knows.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Presenting live or recorded commentary via broadcast media

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: live, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Present live or recorded commentary via broadcast media.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Delivering commentary on air relies on a recognized person the audience trusts.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Photographing or videotaping news events

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: news events, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Photograph or videotape news events.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Filming or photographing a news event means being there with a camera.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay
$62,200a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this

Source: bls-oews

Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)

Rounding: Shown as published.

People doing this job
39,250in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)

What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.

Why this is shifting

The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: work in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: revising work to meet editorial approval or to fit time or space requirements and receiving assignments or evaluating leads or tips to develop story ideas. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where relationships get done. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend

The exposed part of your job is the biggest part, and I am not going to dress that up: revising work to meet editorial approval or to fit time or space requirements is work today's tools do quickly and cheaply, and that is not coming back.

So, given all that: 52% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 11% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 36% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 30 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

What you have that the software does not is establishing and maintaining relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information, plus the years of knowing when something looks wrong before you can say why. That is the raw material for everything below.

This week: one thing

Sit on the machine's side of the desk. Pick one real piece of work you would normally do yourself, let whatever software you already have take the first pass at it, and then go through what it produced and write down every single thing it got wrong. One evening this week. Do not fix anything yet. Just catch it.

What you end up holding
a written list of the machine’s mistakes, in your handwriting
How long it takes
an evening, or an hour if you pick one job rather than one client

If you can’t run software on your employer’s or your clients’ data: Do the same hunt on paper. Take one printed piece of work, work through it the way you always do, and mark every point where you made a call rather than followed a rule. Same evening, same list, nothing to log into and nobody to ask permission from. That list is the same artifact: it is the judgment written down.

Over the next 90 days

Change one sentence about what you do. Not on a CV. Out loud, to whoever pays you. From “my job is revising work to meet editorial approval or to fit time or space requirements” to “I check what the software does and tell you what it means.” Your error list from this week is what makes that sentence true instead of a claim, so use it: show it once, to one person, inside the next ninety days. Same skills, priced as judgment rather than as typing.

Over the next 12 months

Walk toward the end of this job that answers for things, and get it recognised. Pick the one part of establishing and maintaining relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information you are already best at, and spend the year making it formal: a qualification, a named responsibility, a specialism people ask for by name. Price it honestly: that is evenings, it is months rather than weeks, and the seats are competitive because everyone in your position is looking at the same door. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.

The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them

I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.

I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to news analysts, reporters, and journalists (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was editors: only about 3% of its durable work is work you already do. Your own job splits about 52/48: that share of the list sits in the top exposure band and the rest does not. On this evidence the honest move is inside the job rather than out of it. Become the person who owns “arrange interviews with people who can provide information about a story”, and let the exposed end go.

How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.

3 moves I checked and rejected

These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.

  • Editors

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already assign stories to other reporters or duties to production staff, and their equivalent is to supervise and coordinate work of reporters and other editors. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Broadcast Announcers and Radio Disc Jockeys

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already analyze and interpret news and information received from various sources to broadcast the…, and their equivalent is to attend press conferences to gather information for broadcast. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $47,340 against your $62,200, 23.9% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Historians

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already arrange interviews with people who can provide information about a story, and their equivalent is to interview people to gather information about historical events and to record oral histories. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. And it is a narrow door: about 3,450 of those jobs against 39,250 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 9% as many seats.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

What I’d stop worrying about

A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.

  • The headline number you read somewhere

    The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 52% of its task weight, across 30 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.

  • “It’s too late for me to become something else”

    You are not starting from zero, and the page shows why: establishing and maintaining relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information is work the software cannot do and you already do it. The move above is a repricing of what you know, not a new career. Nobody who has just left college has that.

  • “I should learn to code”

    Almost certainly not. The value in your job is moving toward checking, deciding and answering for the output, not toward writing the software. A weekend of Python will not change your position; the error list from this week will.

  • The “obvious” next job everyone suggests

    I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.

You are reading the United States figures

The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Newspaper and periodical broadcast journalists and reporters is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match

The other groups this work is counted across:

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Newspaper and periodical broadcast journalists and reporters and Newspaper, periodical and broadcast editors. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.

Your route through this

Where to go next, and what it costs

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for news analysts / reporters / journalists, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 52% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

Try The AI Authority free →

7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.

The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for news analysts / reporters / journalists. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for news analysts / reporters / journalists launches. Nothing else.

That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.

We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.

No Space for news analysts / reporters / journalists yet. Should there be one?

Collab365 Spaces is built by the same people as this site. We find the problems that AI and automation are creating inside one kind of work, then solve them as short courses, briefings and Blueprints. Each Space is the community too, so the research and the people doing your job are in the same place.

What a Space actually is, in full

Collab365 launches new communities where the need is real. If one for news analysts / reporters / journalists existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for news analysts / reporters / journalists launches. We never sell it, never use it for unrelated marketing, and every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Our privacy policy has the full version.

This unlocks nothing. Every figure, every row and every step on this page is already yours, whether you fill this in or not.

No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.

Questions people ask about this job

Will AI replace News Analysts, Reporters, and Journalists?
Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 30 official task statements scored for News Analysts, Reporters, and Journalists (United States, SOC 27-3023), 52% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 51 out of 100 (range 46–57, band: partial). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
Which tasks in “News Analysts, Reporters, and Journalists” can AI already do?
The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Revise work to meet editorial approval or to fit time or space requirements” (93/100, very high); “Write commentaries, columns, or scripts, using computers” (83/100, very high); “Analyze and interpret news and information received from various sources to broadcast the information” (83/100, very high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
Which tasks in “News Analysts, Reporters, and Journalists” stay human?
About 36% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Photograph or videotape news events” (0/100, minimal); “Establish and maintain relationships with individuals who are credible sources of information” (5/100, minimal); “Present live or recorded commentary via broadcast media” (6/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “News Analysts, Reporters, and Journalists” do about AI?
Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 52% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 36% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
How is the AI exposure score for News Analysts, Reporters, and Journalists calculated?
Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 30 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

Worth knowing about these figures

  • The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
  • 4 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
  • Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
Task statements
onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights
onet-db (im-rt)
Scores
Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
Pay and employment
bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

How we score a jobDownload this releaseLook up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.

Plain text

Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).

BibTeX

@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
  title        = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
  author       = {{Collab365}},
  year         = {2026},
  url          = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
  note         = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}

Permalink

https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1

Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.