By: Mariana Belloso
The panel brought together concrete experiences from La Gaceta (Argentina) and El Tiempo (Colombia)
By: Mariana Belloso
The adoption of artificial intelligence in Latin American newsrooms is no longer a future experiment, but an ongoing practice guided by editorial needs, operational efficiency, and strong human oversight, grounded in the editorial, ethical, and legal guidelines followed by each organization. This was explained during the panel “The newsroom of the future is already here: AI adoption in Latin American media,” held during the Mid-Year Meeting of the Inter-American Press Association (IAPA).
Moderated by digital transformation consultant Néstor Altuve, the panel brought together concrete experiences from La Gaceta (Argentina) and El Tiempo (Colombia), two newsrooms that are moving forward with AI integration based on real challenges in journalistic work.
The First Step: Identifying Problems
Drawing on Argentina’s experience, Pablo Hamada, deputy editor-in-chief at La Gaceta, explained that the integration of AI must begin with identifying real challenges within the newsroom, such as the need to work faster, optimize resources, and bridge knowledge gaps. “We adopt tools when they add value, with a focus on efficiency, based on data and our audience,” he noted.
Within this framework, the outlet developed various solutions, such as a bot that converts videos into article drafts, including projects for live broadcasts—such as congressional sessions or presidential speeches—which are then edited by journalists. The goal is to speed up production times and increase output without sacrificing editorial control.
AI is also applied to audience-facing products: tools to generate covers and video thumbnails for social media, games, and interactive applications such as a 2026 World Cup draw simulator and an Oscars trivia game. A platform that allows subscribers to listen to opinion columns read aloud in the authors’ own voices is available.
In addition, there are article summaries and bots for complex topics, such as laws, which answer public inquiries and identify frequently asked questions—information that is fed back to editors.
Hamada emphasized that adopting AI brings about organizational changes and requires knowledge sharing: “We don’t have a newsroom that’s entirely AI-savvy, which is why we work with a shared knowledge matrix.”
AI as an Exoskeleton
From Colombia, José Carlos García, multimedia editor at El Tiempo, explained that the starting point was an internal assessment: 74% of the newsroom was already using AI. They began, then, by developing an AI user manual, which includes methodologies, clear policies, and criteria regarding why, where, and with what impact to use these tools, avoiding risks such as plagiarism or the misuse of intellectual property.
That approach led to El Tiempo Turbo, a methodology that conceives of AI as an “exoskeleton” or framework, under which human talent always remains, enhancing the journalist’s strategic and creative capacity without replacing them. From there, the outlet developed specific solutions, such as algorithms for the investigative unit that analyze public procurement and tenders, expanding the scope of investigations when signs of corruption emerge. Turbo also detects content opportunities based on trends from Google and other platforms, which serve as input for editors.
The process was consolidated with the creation of an AI unit and an internal AI Toolkit. This is an intranet portal featuring 13 tools that operate in a controlled environment, aligned with the outlet’s style guides and legal criteria. The toolkit allows journalists to streamline various processes, such as converting videos into articles, generating stories from posts on official accounts, and creating images using precise editorial prompts. Currently, El Tiempo is moving forward with a consolidation phase to standardize the use of tools—including those provided by external vendors—and better guide its news teams.
The panel concluded that AI is already present in newsrooms, but its impact depends less on the technology itself than on the editorial, ethical, and strategic decisions that guide its use.