Global Editorial Director Katie Drummond claims that "unearthing and communicating new and newsworthy information? Landing on the turn of phrase that says exactly what you want, so damn beautifully? The illustration that just makes you want to ~*chef’s kiss*~ in a team meeting," is "human work, by humans and for them". Will it remain so through 2028?

Resolution criteria

This market resolves YES if, by December 31, 2028, humans remain demonstrably better than AI systems at both: (1) crafting clever turns of phrase and distinctive prose, and (2) creating compelling illustrations. Resolution requires that professional-grade AI systems have not substantially displaced human work in these domains—meaning humans still produce the majority of commercially valued content in journalism, publishing, and illustration industries, and AI-generated alternatives are not widely preferred by audiences or clients for these specific creative tasks.

This market resolves NO if AI systems have become competitive with or superior to humans in either domain, as evidenced by widespread adoption of AI-generated prose or illustrations in professional publishing, journalism, or commercial design contexts, or if major publications have shifted to primarily AI-generated content for these purposes.

Background

Katie Drummond, Wired's Global Editorial Director, claims that "unearthing and communicating new and newsworthy information" and "landing on the turn of phrase that says exactly what you want, so damn beautifully" is "human work, by humans and for them." Wired plans to use AI selectively for copyediting and research, but core journalism work stays human.

Current AI capabilities show mixed results. Researchers studying professional writers found that AI tools could enhance the creative process rather than replace human writers, with one researcher noting "I don't actually think the way we train the models right now will ever replace the best writers." However, while AI can produce creative writing at high speed, it often lacks the emotional depth and creativity of human writers. For illustration, artists raised concerns in 2022 about generative AI's impact on their ability to earn money, particularly in illustration and design industries.

Considerations

The question hinges on whether AI systems will achieve human-level performance in two distinct creative domains by 2028—a relatively short timeframe. Current AI excels at pattern matching and statistical prediction but struggles with originality and emotional resonance. The resolution depends on both technological advancement and market adoption: even if AI becomes technically capable, human preference and industry standards could preserve human dominance in these fields. Additionally, regulatory or ethical pushback against AI-generated content could slow adoption in professional publishing contexts.

Link to article: https://www.wired.com/story/ai-journalism-worst-thing-about-ai/