Thought leadership has become something of a buzzword in public relations circles, but at its core, it's a reputation-building effort that demands strategy, authenticity, and time.

Many professionals approach their PR teams with aspirations of being seen as industry leaders, the go-to expert for market commentary or even a coveted by-lined column in a major publication.

The true value of a successful program can't always be measured in clippings or metrics, and while a well-placed quote or a grab on the 6pm news makes for great LinkedIn clout, there's a troubling trend undermining these efforts.

Recently a journalist told me that the sheer volume of responses they receive, clearly generated by ChatGPT or similar tools, is forcing a revolt in newsrooms across the country.

The signs are everywhere once you know what to look for, such as Americanised spelling, robotic phrasing with awkward dashes or unnatural transitions, and generic insights that lack depth or industry-specific nuance.

The journalist explained that no matter how impressive someone's title or experience might be, an AI-generated reply sends a clear message that this person isn't the expert they, or their PR agency, claimed them to be.

It’s become grounds for an automatic blacklist, and the situation has grown so dire that some outlets are considering abandoning written responses altogether in favour of phone calls – an old school approach I can get behind.  

But this journalist’s admission raises an important question: is saving time really worth compromising your hard-earned reputation?

The answer should be a resounding ‘no’, yet too many still don't grasp the stakes.

Although an AI-built response makes my teeth grind, I understand the temptation. Time is scarce, and for financial advisers, analysts, or executives, crafting a tailored media response often falls to the bottom of an overflowing to-do list.

AI offers a seductive solution: a polished-sounding reply in seconds. After all, they are giving the journalist what they want, a timely response alongside a slick corporate headshot, right?

Wrong.

This convenience comes at a cost.

Journalists aren't just looking for a response, they're seeking your unique perspective. If you’ve worked hard to build a relationship with a reporter, sending an uneditedAI draft doesn't just insult their intelligence, it erodes trust in your expertise.

Journalists are onto it, and frankly, over it.

So how should busy professionals navigate this?

First, lean on your PR team. A good representative will spot AI’s infiltration, tell you that the answer is not up to scratch, and help craft a reply that sounds authentically yours. And if you're truly pressed for time, consider proposing a quick phone call instead of risking a hollow written response that could damage your credibility.

After all, it’s not just your reputation at stake here, it’s ours too.

There’s no arguing that AI will only get better from here, but good habits start now.If there’s one piece of advice I can impart from this, it would be that the experts whose opinions are most sought by the media, simply, do the work.

And if you’re wondering whether AI, be it ChatGPT or DeepSeek, played a role in helping me draft this article, the answer is no.

But if it had, I'd have made sure you'd never know.

‍