Georgia O'Brien-Perry, digital PR manager at Bulldog Digital Media: “The rise of fake AI experts is frustrating because it damages trust across the board, even for those of us doing things properly. If journalists start to question the authenticity of expert sources, we could see more rigorous vetting, which slows things down and raises the bar for credibility. But honestly, I think that’s a good thing.

“We’re already seeing more requests for headshots, social links, and deeper background info. That’s manageable, but it gets tricky when clients are private individuals, camera-shy, or simply don’t want their photo online, which likely accounts for some of these fake experts. This makes things harder for PRs, but it also helps set clearer boundaries with clients - they’ll have to be open to being more public if they want the best links. It is PUBLIC relations after all.

“It’s also a chance for PRs to double down on quality, pitching experts who offer genuine, deep insight, not just a vague job title. Journalists can spot waffle a mile off, so this shift forces us to refine outreach. In the long run, it’ll just raise the bar for what gets picked up, and that’s no bad thing.”

Jonathan Coad, crisis PR lawyer, Coad Law: “The significance of fake AI experts cited by journalists for crisis PR professionals is that they can be used to provide fake corroboration for false stories, which journalists cannot stand up by any legitimate means.

“Not only is this very poor journalism, for all newspaper titles governed by the Independent Press Standards Organisation Code, it is a breach of the obligation to take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information.”

Liliya Arutyunyan, founder and director at Let's Press: "I think the [Press Gazette] article raises serious concerns for the PR industry. It makes it even more important for PR professionals to ensure that the authority and credibility of their clients are clearly presented to journalists, and for journalists to take extra care in verifying the information they're given.

“It's already getting harder every year to secure media coverage for clients and situations like this make it likely that journalists will become more sceptical of the pitches they receive. Now more than ever, PRs need to work harder, not just to get their clients quoted but to earn and maintain the trust of journalists.

“For us, that means sending stronger supporting materials, verified background information and building stronger relationships with journalists before sending a pitch, especially for international media coverage. Trust and accuracy are the most important aspects of both industries, and once they are gone, it becomes harder for everyone to do their jobs the right way."

Mike Nolan, co-founder at PressPlugs: “We've been acutely aware of AI's growing impact for the last few years, especially as it becomes a more significant challenge for journalists seeking experts, particularly on social media.

“Having been on high alert for quite some time, we have an instinct for spotting red flags. We know that when certain individuals are granted access to our service, problems are likely to follow.

“When we begin probing those who raise concerns [for us], asking about their businesses, or for social media links, many don’t respond. Thanks to the precautions we've taken, we haven’t encountered any issues with AI-driven spam replies.”

Carl Stroud, chief storyteller at Smoking Gun: “There’s no doubt about it, newsrooms are in their expertise era. Press Gazette’s barnstorming exposé highlights two key points: how the PR/reporter relationship is never fixed and the grip Google still holds on the media.

“It’s worth winding the clock back 12 months. This time last year, Google’s core algorithm updates triggered a bloodbath in Britain’s newsrooms. The updates were designed to ‘improve the quality of search results by showing more content that people find genuinely useful’.

“Overnight, major news publishers — including The Sun, Mail, and Reach PLC — vanished from search. The Sun’s audience dropped from 140 million to 70 million. In response, the EEAT (experience, expertise, authoritativeness and trustworthiness) framework now rules, and reporters increasingly need expert voices offering credible advice that truly benefits readers.

“That’s where PR can add real value by connecting journalists with sector-specific expertise that drives engagement. But it’s an arrangement open to abuse, as Press Gazette so expertly exposed.

“Ultimately, just like the EEAT framework, this system only works if expert commentary comes from trusted sources. We’ll certainly see more scrutiny in newsrooms and more questions about credentials. That can only be a good thing for the overwhelming majority of PR professionals who already do things the right way.”

Omar Fazal Jamil CEO at Latitude CRS: “Journalists ought to possess a healthy degree of skepticism, which means checking and rechecking all their reporting and taking nothing at face value — even if the comment is coming from a trusted source. This is an intrinsic part of good journalism and not something that is, or ought to be affected by AI. It is and remains incumbent upon the journalist to check the veracity of their reporting before going to print.

“Has AI made it easier for unscrupulous PRs and journalists to fake content? Absolutely, but such individuals existed even before AI. While the Press Gazette article exemplifies AI misuse, I don’t think this and similar cases will necessarily make journalists more cautious. I do think that while we go through this adjustment period, journalists will be more inclined to deal with trusted PRs and sources; however, as always, the determining factor will always be the quality of the content.”

Aimee Cashmore, senior account manager at Words + Pixels: “Will this growing trend impact the process of PR’s getting their clients quoted in the press? Absolutely. Some already have a level of hesitancy towards PRs, and this will likely lead to more being asked of us to prove the credibility of our experts. But that is not necessarily a bad thing. With fake news and AI-generated content becoming more common, increased scrutiny leads to more robust reporting, and that is where genuinely credible voices can shine.

“The best earned media has always been built on trust. This trend will only make strong, one-to-one relationships between PRs and journalists even more important. If you spend months or years understanding a journalist’s beat, the inner workings of an outlet, delivering credible spokespeople and building solid relationships, that trust is already in place and it puts you ahead, as it always has.

“We may also see a shift away from written-only comments, which are often used by busy journalists and spokespeople and a greater demand for live or verbal interviews, where expertise is harder to fake. This trend ultimately reinforces what good PR has always been about, real relationships and real expertise.”