Journalists at Politico and E&E News have entered arbitration with management over claims that the company breached AI-related protections in their collective bargaining agreement. It is one of the first significant tests of enforceable AI rules within a newsroom.
The PEN Guild, representing journalists at the two outlets, secured contract terms requiring management to negotiate over new AI tools and ensure any AI-generated content meets the same ethical and editorial standards as human reporting. The protections aim to safeguard journalism as AI adoption grows across the industry.
The union alleges Politico violated the agreement in two ways.
First, by publishing AI-generated live coverage of political events without informing the union or ensuring proper human editorial review.
Second, by launching an AI-powered research tool for subscribers that produced fabricated reports, including false analyses of lobbying groups such as the “Basket Weavers Guild” and the “League of Left-Handed Plumbers”. The tool, developed with the startup Capitol AI, was intended to generate reports based on Politico’s journalism.
The PEN Guild described the tool’s output as “garbled intelligence” and “made-up Washington news”, arguing that such errors breach the contract’s requirement for human oversight and editorial standards.
The case highlights the lack of federal rules governing AI use in media, with union contracts increasingly seen as the main mechanism for setting enforceable standards. “We’re fighting not just for our contract, but for the future of ethical journalism in the age of AI,” said Arianna Skibell, the union’s vice chair for contract enforcement.
Politico’s agreement with the PEN Guild was among the first in the industry to include explicit AI protections. The contract also covers pay equity, benefits and layoff terms. The arbitration outcome is expected to set an important precedent for how much influence journalists have over AI use in their newsrooms.
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
10
Notes:
The narrative is current, with the arbitration hearing taking place on July 11, 2025. The earliest known publication date of substantially similar content is July 11, 2025, from Talking Biz News. The report is original and not recycled from other sources. The narrative is based on a press release from the PEN Guild, which typically warrants a high freshness score. No discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were found. The content has not appeared more than 7 days earlier. The article includes updated data and does not recycle older material.
Quotes check
Score:
10
Notes:
The direct quotes from union representatives, such as Arianna Skibell and Ariel Wittenberg, are unique to this report. No identical quotes appear in earlier material, indicating potentially original or exclusive content. No variations in quote wording were found.
Source reliability
Score:
10
Notes:
The narrative originates from a press release issued by the PEN Guild, representing over 270 journalists at Politico and E&E News. The PEN Guild is a reputable organisation, and the press release is a direct communication from them, ensuring reliability.
Plausability check
Score:
10
Notes:
The claims about the arbitration over AI-related protections are plausible and align with previous reports from reputable sources. For instance, WIRED reported on the legal battle between Politico’s newsroom and management over AI implementation, highlighting similar concerns. ([wired.com](https://www.wired.com/story/politico-workers-axel-springer-artificial-intelligence/?utm_source=openai)) The narrative includes specific details, such as the involvement of CapitolAI in developing the ‘Report Builder’ tool, which adds credibility. The language and tone are consistent with typical press releases from professional organisations.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative is fresh, original, and based on a reliable source—the PEN Guild’s press release. The claims are plausible and supported by previous reputable reports. No significant issues were identified in the freshness, quotes, source reliability, or plausibility checks.
