AI Can’t Replace Community. It Can Create More Time for It.

Artificial intelligence is changing journalism faster than many publishers expected.

For community publishers, that reality brings understandable questions. Should we use AI? How much? Will audiences trust us? How do we protect our credibility while still taking advantage of tools that can save time?

Those questions were at the center of a recent Pivot Fund convening with Indiegraf, Fostering Context, Community and Connection in the Age of AI, moderated by Pivot Fund Senior Director of Programs Frances Kai-Hwa Wang. The discussion featured Laura Davis, Editorial & Partnerships Lead at Indiegraf; Erica Ngao, Impact Manager at Indiegraf; Mark Talkington, founder and publisher of the Palm Springs Post; Martina Guzmán, founder of VERDAD; and Ashton Pittman, News Editor at Mississippi Free Press. 

Together, they shared practical ways community publishers can use AI while protecting what matters most: trust, transparency and community relationships. The conversation also highlighted resources available through Indiegraf’s Tech for Journalism program to help small newsrooms navigate AI thoughtfully.

One message surfaced again and again:

The goal isn’t to replace journalists. It’s to create more time for journalism.

Start with trust—not technology

One of the biggest takeaways wasn’t about software. It was about transparency.

News consumers are already wondering whether AI is influencing the information they consume. Rather than avoiding the conversation, speakers encouraged publishers to explain how they use AI, or why they choose not to use it.

A clear AI policy helps audiences understand where human judgment remains central to reporting and editing. It also gives publishers an opportunity to reinforce the values that distinguish community journalism: accountability, accuracy and relationships.

Whether your newsroom embraces AI or decides not to use it, telling your audience builds trust.

Let AI handle repetitive work

Several presenters emphasized that AI is most valuable when it removes repetitive tasks—not editorial judgment.

Mark Talkington of Palm Springs Post shared how his newsroom uses AI to organize meeting transcripts, identify story ideas, draft first versions of routine civic stories and automate administrative tasks. Every story is still reviewed, fact-checked and edited by journalists before publication.

The result isn’t fewer journalists.

It’s more capacity.

Instead of spending hours summarizing public meetings or formatting newsletters, reporters can spend more time interviewing sources, investigating stories and engaging with residents.

For many small newsrooms, that time is their most limited resource.

Build trust before you build an AI workflow

One of the webinar’s strongest messages came from Indiegraf’s Laura Davis: whether your newsroom uses AI extensively, sparingly or not at all, your audience deserves to know.

Research from Trusting News suggests people increasingly want transparency about how journalism is produced. If audiences don’t know your approach, they may make assumptions that affect how they perceive and trust your reporting.

That’s why Davis encouraged publishers to develop and publicly share an AI—or even a “No AI”—policy. The goal isn’t to create a lengthy ethics document. It’s to clearly explain your newsroom’s approach, how it aligns with your mission and where human judgment remains central to your journalism.

For newsrooms that don’t use AI, Indiegraf’s AI Policy Builder helps publishers quickly explain that every story is produced by humans and why that decision supports their mission. For organizations experimenting with AI, Trusting News’ AI Worksheet walks newsrooms through practical questions like:

• Why are we using AI?
• Where in our workflow do we use it—and where don’t we?
• How do humans review and verify AI-assisted work?
• How will we be transparent with our audience?

As Davis emphasized, the policy itself isn’t the destination. The larger goal is building trust by showing audiences how your journalism is created and reinforcing that editorial responsibility always remains with people—not technology.

AI can strengthen community reporting

One of the most compelling examples came from journalist Martina Guzmán, who demonstrated VERDAD, an AI-powered tool that monitors Spanish-language radio for misinformation and disinformation.

Rather than replacing reporters, the platform helps journalists detect emerging narratives, monitor broadcasts across multiple markets, translate content and identify stories that deserve deeper reporting. It allows journalists serving immigrant communities to respond more quickly while remaining grounded in human reporting and verification.

It’s an example of AI expanding a newsroom’s ability to listen—not replacing the people doing the listening.

Community remains your greatest advantage

Throughout the discussion, one point became increasingly clear.

Large language models can summarize information.

They cannot build trust at a neighborhood meeting.

They cannot develop relationships with local residents.

They cannot understand the history, context and lived experiences that shape community reporting.

Whether publishers choose to embrace AI, avoid it or fall somewhere in between, the competitive advantage remains the same: context, community and connection.

A few places to start

If you’re beginning to think about AI in your newsroom:

• Create and publish an AI (or No AI) policy.
• Be transparent with audiences about how AI is—and isn’t—used.
• Use AI first for repetitive administrative work rather than editorial decisions.
• Reinvest the time AI saves into reporting, relationship-building and community listening.
• Keep human editors responsible for final decisions.

Community publishers have always competed on trust rather than scale.

AI doesn’t change that.

If anything, it makes those trusted relationships even more valuable.