Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{210718,
        author = {Nagaiswarya R and Dr. Deepa viswam},
        title = {AI-GENERATED NEWS VS. HUMAN-INVESTIGATED NEWS: AUDIENCE PERCEPTION AND TRUST},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2026},
        volume = {13},
        number = {6},
        pages = {2022-2027},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=210718},
        abstract = {Artificial Intelligence (AI) is now infiltrating almost every field, and the journalism sector is no exception. AI helps journalists perform their work more quickly and efficiently and enables them to process large volumes of data within minutes. However, its growing use also raises concerns regarding misinformation, bias, credibility, transparency, ethical responsibility, and human accountability. This research examines the audience’s understanding and perception of AI-generated news content. It specifically investigates consumers’ perceptions and levels of trust when comparing AI-generated news with human-investigated news. For this study, a quantitative survey was conducted online among participants in Tamil Nadu. A total of 52 respondents participated in the survey and provided their responses to the questionnaire. The questionnaire examined demographic characteristics, news consumption patterns, awareness of AI-generated news, preferred forms of news production, perceptions of misinformation detection, beliefs about AI ethics, and perceptions of bias. The findings show that 40 respondents (76.9%) trusted human-investigated news, compared with 5 respondents (9.6%) who preferred AI-assisted human journalism and 4 respondents (7.7%) who trusted AI-generated news. Regarding misinformation detection, human journalists and journalists assisted by AI were equally preferred, with 20 respondents (38.5%) selecting each. The study also found considerable uncertainty regarding AI ethics, with 22 respondents (42.3%) answering “No” and another 22 (42.3%) answering “Maybe” when asked whether AI can follow ethical principles. Furthermore, 24 respondents (46.2%) believed that both AI and human journalism could be biased. The results show that although AI is useful in journalism for news gathering, production, verification, and distribution, audiences continue to value human judgment, accountability, and editorial responsibility. This study suggests the need to support a human–AI collaborative model in which AI assists and enhances journalistic work, while final editorial decisions and responsibility remain with human professionals.},
        keywords = {},
        month = {November},
        }