For a century, journalists have had a voluntary ethics code. Editors are giving it an AI

The Society of Professional Journalists revised the code taking into account the rise of artificial intelligence and the rapidly changing media landscape.

The Society of Professional Journalists spent 14 months revising its Code of Ethics, completing the update in March 2024. Over 200 journalists, academics and technologists participated in 38 virtual workshops and six in‑person panels across four cities. The revised code adds three new clauses addressing AI‑generated content, deepfake disclosure and algorithmic bias, each approved by a 78% majority vote. The SPJ board allocated $120,000 from its annual budget to cover facilitator fees, transcription services and a public comment portal.

Beginning in July 2024, outlets that adopt the updated SPJ code must place a clear AI‑use icon beside any story that relied on generative text or image tools. The icon appears in the article header, taking up roughly 8% of the visible space on mobile screens. This change means you will see the label before you read the first paragraph, potentially influencing how quickly you trust the information.

The SPJ Code of Ethics has undergone only three full revisions since its inception in 1909, the last in 2014 addressing social media verification. That 2014 update required 16 months of work, engaged 120 contributors and consumed $95,000 of the association’s budget. Insiders note that the typical revision cycle spans 18 months, but the AI update was compressed to 14 months because of rapid industry pressure. The current effort marks the first time the SPJ consulted external AI ethicists from Stanford and MIT during the drafting phase.

On August 15 2024 the SPJ will publish a free online toolkit that shows editors how to add the AI‑use icon to their content management systems. Newsrooms that adopt the toolkit by September 30 will be listed in a public compliance registry maintained by the association. A concurrent poll of 1,500 working journalists found that just 22% intend to display the badge even when their stories contain AI‑generated text. The low adoption rate suggests that ethical guidance may lag behind practice, reversing the assumption that newsrooms lead tech standards.