FOR two days this week, the usually fast-paced Sarawak Tribune newsroom looked a little different.
Instead of reporters rushing from one assignment to another or editors juggling page deadlines, the newsroom became a classroom as journalists gathered for a Malaysian Press Institute (MPI) workshop on the Application of AI Technology in Journalism.
Designed specifically for the Sarawak Tribune team, the programme was intended to introduce artificial intelligence not as a replacement for journalism, but as a practical tool to support the work journalists do every day.
Like many people, I went into the workshop expecting much of the discussion to revolve around artificial intelligence itself.
With new AI platforms emerging almost every month and headlines constantly debating whether technology will eventually replace human jobs, it seemed only natural that the focus would be on the capabilities of these rapidly evolving tools.
Instead, what stood out over the two days was something far less technical but infinitely more important.
The workshop was not really about artificial intelligence.
It was about journalism.
From the very first session, it became clear that the purpose was never to teach journalists how to let AI write stories on their behalf.
Rather, it was to demonstrate how technology could assist with the many time-consuming tasks that take place before a story is ever written, while reinforcing that the principles underpinning good journalism remain unchanged.
One of the earliest exercises illustrated this perfectly.
Participants were asked to generate a news article from a press release using ChatGPT before comparing every sentence, every fact and every quotation against the original document.
The objective was not to see how quickly a story could be produced, but to remind us that no matter how polished or convincing the output appeared, accuracy could never be assumed.
Every fact still had to be verified, every quotation checked and every sentence subjected to editorial judgement before it was suitable for publication.
It was a simple exercise, yet it carried one of the workshop’s most important lessons.
Artificial intelligence can generate information, but it cannot guarantee truth.
As the sessions progressed, the workshop moved beyond content generation and into the practical realities of newsroom work.
We learnt how to create AI projects tailored to different reporting beats, organise reference materials into searchable knowledge bases and build AI assistants that could support journalists covering politics, business, crime, sports and feature writing.
We were also introduced to prompt engineering, which at first sounded highly technical but, in reality, shared much in common with one of journalism’s oldest skills – asking the right questions.
Whether interviewing a cabinet minister, preparing for an exclusive feature or searching through hundreds of pages of official documents, the quality of the answers has always depended on the quality of the questions being asked.
Artificial intelligence, we quickly discovered, is no different.
Another useful session introduced Perplexity, a platform designed to support research by drawing information from reliable and official sources, allowing journalists to prepare verified newsroom briefings more efficiently.
For reporters who regularly spend hours reading lengthy reports, budget documents or technical papers, such tools offer a practical way of reducing administrative work without sacrificing the depth of reporting.
Rather than replacing careful reading, they provide a useful starting point by identifying key themes and areas that require closer scrutiny, ultimately creating more time for interviews, verification and field reporting.
Yet what impressed me most was that every demonstration came with the same reminder.
Artificial intelligence may speed up research, organise information and even suggest ideas worth exploring, but it can never remove the journalist’s responsibility to verify every piece of information before it reaches the public.
That reminder feels especially relevant today.
Artificial intelligence can now generate articles, realistic images, convincing videos and even replicate voices within minutes.
As the barriers to producing content continue to disappear, distinguishing between information and misinformation becomes increasingly difficult.
Ironically, that makes credible journalism even more valuable.
Readers no longer struggle to find information. They struggle to know which information deserves their trust.
Trust is not built through increasingly sophisticated software or powerful algorithms.
It is built when a reporter makes one more phone call because a fact does not quite add up.
It is built when editors insist on confirming figures through multiple sources before publication, or when a journalist chooses to delay a story until every important detail has been verified.
These are the decisions readers rarely see, yet they are the very foundation of responsible journalism.
Every experienced reporter also knows that some of the most important parts of reporting never appear in the final article.
They happen during the conversation after a press conference has ended, the pause before someone answers a difficult question or the quiet moment when a reluctant source finally decides to speak.
Those moments cannot be replicated by artificial intelligence because they rely on observation, empathy, trust and human connection.
Neither can AI build relationships with communities over years of consistent reporting or earn the confidence of people willing to share deeply personal experiences because they trust their stories will be told fairly and accurately.
Those responsibilities have always belonged to journalists, and they always will.
The profession itself has never stood still.
Newsrooms have evolved from typewriters to desktop computers, from film cameras to digital photography and from printed newspapers to real-time digital publishing.
Every technological shift has changed the way journalists work, yet none has altered the fundamental purpose of journalism itself.
Artificial intelligence is simply the latest chapter in that evolution.
Like every tool before it, its value depends entirely on how responsibly it is used.
As the workshop came to an end, I realised I was leaving with much more than a better understanding of artificial intelligence.
I left with a renewed appreciation for journalism itself and for the responsibilities that come with the privilege of informing the public.
Artificial intelligence will undoubtedly become an increasingly important part of modern newsrooms, and journalists would be doing themselves a disservice by refusing to understand the technology reshaping the profession.
However, embracing innovation should never come at the expense of the principles that have guided journalism for generations.
Accuracy, fairness, accountability and integrity – these values have survived every technological revolution the profession has experienced, and they remain just as relevant today as they were decades ago.
The newsroom may be changing, and the tools we use will undoubtedly continue to evolve, but the essence of journalism has never been defined by technology.
It has always been defined by the people who ask difficult questions, seek the truth, verify the facts and tell stories that matter.
That, more than anything else, was the most valuable lesson from two days in the classroom.
The views expressed here are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of Sarawak Tribune. The writer can be reached at sarahhafizahchandra@gmail.com.
