Every year, Harvard University’s Nieman Journalism Lab solicits predictions for the coming year from “some of the smartest people in journalism.” And while I’m not sure I fall into the category of “smartest,” they ask me for my predictions, anyway.

In 2020, I predicted that the press wouldn’t be able to break its Trump obsession in 2021. In 2021, I predicted that 2022 would be a year where journalists helped uphold or doom democracy. And for 2023, I’m predicting that the right-wing moral panic movement will reach new heights, with mainstream outlets either on board with that or too resource-strained to push back in a meaningful way.

It’s not a particularly bold or shocking prediction. Really, it’s just an extension of what’s already happening. I’ve watched in horror for the past several years as Republican lawmakers, “contrarian” writers, and right-wing pundits have targeted LGBTQ people. I’ve watched as Republican politicians try, repeatedly and sometimes successfully, to enshrine anti-trans sentiment into law while many (not all) of the “good” politicians on the Democratic side turn a blind eye to the horrors happening. All the while, mainstream news organizations take the disingenuous Republican arguments at face value (remember when they all pretended to care about women’s sports earlier in the year? And now they’re pretending to care about, uh… bone density for trans kids? Okay, sure, right, right), making it near impossible to actually cut through the smears.

The tl;dr is that I think this trend is going to only get worse in 2023. I hope I’m wrong. One of my concerns is that recent layoffs at news organizations will create a vacuum to be filled by some bad actors:

As an industry, the American press is in a very difficult position, though that’s been true for as long as I’ve been a part of it. My concern for 2023 has more to do with what will fill the increasingly large news vacuums and set the nation’s news agenda.

I worry that all of this will make the media ecosystem so weak that what’s left will be a mess of “pink slime” content, politically driven propaganda, and a reliance on curated material from outlets chasing new subscriptions and an ever-shrinking share of ad revenue, tied to the whims and business decisions of billionaire social media tycoons. And that’s where the moral panics come in.

Over the past few years, the right-wing media ecosystem and its preferred political candidates have relentlessly hammered away on so-called “culture war” issues. The more these media organizations, some of which operate at a financial loss but continue to publish thanks to outside funding (and because the purpose of these groups is often more about steering public attention toward their political goals than it is to operate as successful businesses), shine their spotlight on “controversial” issues of their choosing, the more that what remains of the mainstream American press will feel compelled to follow along lest they be called “liberal” — something they will absolutely be called no matter what they write, say, or produce — and that will have disastrous consequences for the subjects of these political campaigns.

But enough about my prediction. I want to talk about some of the other ones I found to be insightful.

Again, the entire list is worth checking out, but I wanted to share a few of the ones that made me think.

I wasn’t the only one worried about right-wing moral panics.

Some of the predictions make for accidental companion pieces to my own. Tre’vell Anderson and A.J. Bauer both highlight the role the press has wittingly and unwittingly played in helping the anti-trans/anti-gay/anti-left movements shape public opinion. And like both Anderson and Bauer, I don’t picture 2023 being much of an improvement.

• Continued culpability in anti-trans campaigns. “There aren’t two sides to the humanity of trans people.” — Tre’vell Anderson, freelance entertainment journalist and podcast host

• Covering the right wrong. “Journalists can’t be so cavalier as to assume that ‘shedding light’ on antisemitism, transphobia, homophobia, xenophobia, and racism is always either harmless or beneficial.” — A.J. Bauer, assistant professor in the Department of Journalism and Creative Media at the University of Alabama

There were lots (and lots and lots and lots) of predictions about what role artificial intelligence might play in the future of journalism.

I’ve been extremely fascinated by (what certainly seems to be) the large leap forward in the world of AI that happened this year. And while I certainly predict that there will be a big “AI-generated news boom” in 2023, I figured that a.) other people would make predictions about AI, and b.) those people would be much more qualified to offer opinions on this topic, so much of which exists in a technological and ethical gray area right now. And yep, it turns out others had it covered.

Here are some of the more interesting predictions (in my opinion, but there are more than a dozen, and you should check them all out if you can). I’m sure that my 2023 writing will include a number of stories about AI in journalism — the ethical questions, the economic questions, etc.

• Local News will come to rely on AI. “If we automate some commodity news, we can provide a lot more information to people who need it.” — Bill Grueskin, professor at the Columbia Journalism School

• AI enters the newsroom. “These tools could free reporters up to spend more time interviewing sources and digging up information and less time transcribing interviews and writing daily stories on deadline.” — Peter Sterne, independent journalist

• Journalists productively harness generative AI tools. “It’s probably better to think of these tools as internal newsroom tools, making suggestions to reporters and editors rather than generating text that will be directly published.” — Nicholas Diakopoulos, associate professor of communication studies and computer science at Northwestern University

• AI will start fact-checking. We may not like the results. “We can be open to the disruptive power of artificial intelligence at all points in our value chain, instead of closing ourselves off and assuming the future will look just like today.” — Sam Guzik, head of product strategy for WNYC and a foresight expert advisor at the Future Today Institute

• ChatGPT and the future of trust. “We will see ChatGPT and tools like it used in adversarial ways that are intended to undermine trust in information environments, pushing people away from public discourse to increasingly homogenous communities.” — Janet Haven, executive director of Data & Society

• The AI content flood. “For good and bad, AI-written content will flood the internet, an amalgamation of the work of millions of human writers and journalists who came before it.” — Cory Bergman, co-founder of Factal

• Generative AI brings wrongness at scale. “For all its promise, generative AI can get more wrong, faster — and with greater apparent certitude and less transparency — than any innovation in recent memory.” — Eric Ulken, product director at Gannett

• The year AI truly arrives — and with it the reckoning. “Journalists will become even more essential to society as AI enters the mainstream, where we will help set standards, track potential abuses, and bring our ethics and standards to the technology.” — Burt Herman, co-founder and board chair of Hacks/Hackers

Newsletters were another popular topic for predictions.

Tim Carmody brings up a number of important points about how the newsletter format for journalists removes ethical safeguards and editors that typically exist at larger news organizations. And Jim VandeHei thinks newsletters will be fine, but bad newsletters will bite the dust.

• Newsletter writers need a new ethics. “Outside the framework of established institutions and expectations for how writers interact with the people funding their work, these writers are usually left on their own to sort out any ethical conundrums that might arise.” — Tim Carmody, writer on media, technology, art, and culture.

• There is no “peak newsletter”. “People will realize the idea that we had reached ‘peak newsletter’ was both stupid and undermined by the data and consumer preference.” — Jim VandeHei, CEO and cofounder of Axios.

Fighting misinformation, defending democracy and “free speech” debates also generated some worthwhile predictions

I thought this one about stories being framed around “free speech” rather than the merits of an argument from Jonas Kaiser was spot-on. It’s a topic I’ve touched on before and one I plan to expand upon in the new year. For now, check out Kaiser’s piece.

• Rejecting the “free speech” frame. “We should press for an honest debate, and journalists in particular shouldn’t fall victim to the right’s often dishonest use of the ‘free speech’ frame.” — Jonas Kaiser, assistant professor for journalism at Suffolk University and faculty associate at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society

Julia Angwin’s prediction for more government investment in journalists and journalism sounds a bit optimistic for me, but is worth checking out to understand the current stakes.

• Democracies will get serious about saving journalism. “If democracy is going to survive, we’re going to need to fund its watchdogs.” — Julia Angwin, founder and editor-at-large of The Markup

What do you think the new year holds for the world of journalism? Are you optimistic? Pessimistic? What trends do you see happening? What would you like to see happen? Is there anything in particular you’d like to see me cover in the new year over here at TPA? I’m leaving the comments open for this one (I usually have it set to only allow comments from paid subscribers), so have at it!

Leave a comment