Category: News

In a virtual briefing hosted by the European Union of Science Journalists Associations (EUSJA), António Granado, coordinator of the Journalism Science Alliance (JSA) and co‑director of the Master in Science Communication at Universidade Nova de Lisboa, outlined the origins, achievements and upcoming grant opportunities of the JSA.

The session, moderated by EUSJA president Fintan Burke, provided practical guidance for journalists and media outlets eager to apply for the latest call, which closes on 23 March 2026.

The Alliance seeks to fill two gaps:

• Declining audience trust – Young Europeans increasingly avoid news, prompting a need for transparent, fact‑checked storytelling.
• Limited funding for collaborative investigations – Both journalism and scientific research enjoy separate funding streams, but joint projects that combine investigative reporting with scientific analysis have historically lacked dedicated support.

How the programme works

The JSA offers grants ranging from €10 000 to €50 000 per project, with a total budget of €1 million for the 2026 call. Grants cover an eight‑month project period, and the programme has funded 24 projects across 15 European countries in the previous call, in 2025.

Successful proposals must meet several structural requirements:

• At least one media outlet (lead applicant) and one research institution. Freelancers may apply if attached to a media outlet.
• Media outlet must be based in a Creative Europe participating country; non‑European partners can join only as part of a consortium led by a European outlet.
• Grants are offered in three tiers: €10 000, €20 000, or €50 000, depending on scope and budget justification.

Detailed receipts are only required for potential audits by the European Commission, not for routine monitoring by the JSA.

What makes a competitive application

Several recurring themes emerged from the jury’s feedback in the previous round:

• Clear investigative angle – Projects must demonstrate a novel public‑interest question that cannot be answered without scientific input.
• Scientist’s contribution – The researcher should be integral to data collection, analysis, or methodological design, rather than a peripheral source.
• Balanced journalism‑science blend – Applications overly focused on scientific methodology without a compelling journalistic narrative were rejected. Conversely, projects lacking genuine scientific involvement were also deemed unsuitable.
• Strong narrative and impact plan – The jury looks for clear dissemination strategies (print, broadcast, documentary, digital series) and measurable outcomes for public awareness.
• Relevant expertise – While senior journalists add credibility, the jury prioritises the project’s merit over résumé length. CVs are required but are not decisive.

The program aims to produce publishable stories, not scholarly articles.

Practical advice for applicants

During the Q&A, Granado addressed common concerns:

• Freelance journalists – They may apply provided they partner with a media outlet that will receive the grant and contract the freelancer. Direct payments to individuals are prohibited by EU regulations.
• Repeated submissions – Applicants who previously submitted a proposal can refine and resubmit the same concept, improving the investigative framing or scientific partnership.
• Scope of topics – Food safety, nutrition misinformation, environmental monitoring, health‑policy analysis, and technology ethics are all acceptable, provided the investigation uncovers new evidence or challenges prevailing narratives.
• Scientific role flexibility – Scientists can supply macro‑economic frameworks, statistical modelling, laboratory analyses, or field data collection, depending on the story’s needs.
• Support sessions – The JSA will host live Q&A webinars on 05 February and 05 March 2026. Prospective applicants are encouraged to attend for personalised feedback and possible networking with former grantees.

Looking ahead

The 2026 call marks the Alliance’s second round since its launch. With 162 applications from 54 countries in the previous cycle, the jury expects a similarly competitive field. Granado highlighted that the funded projects will be showcased on the JSA website and may be featured in partner media outlets across Europe, amplifying the impact of science‑backed investigative journalism.

Update: An earlier version of this post had incorrect information on the funding tiers and dates. We apologise for the error.

In January the EUSJA webinar “How to Utilise AI Tools in Daily Work Efficiently” welcomed Isabel Lerch, a data journalist from Germany’s public broadcaster NDR. She guided participants through the AI landscape that is reshaping modern journalism.

Why AI matters for journalists

Lerch began by reminding the audience that AI is no longer a novelty. It is now a daily assistant for research, fact-checking, writing, and even visual design. She stressed that AI can speed up routine tasks, allowing reporters to focus on deeper investigation and storytelling. But she warned that AI can also produce plausible-looking but false information (known as ‘hallucinations’), so human oversight remains essential.

The “big four”

According to Lerch, most journalists gravitate toward a handful of large AI services.

These include:

1. ChatGPT (OpenAI): Easy to use, versatile, strong at generating drafts and brainstorming ideas.
2. Google Gemini: Excellent at factual retrieval, offers a “deep research” mode that spends extra time gathering reliable sources.
3. Claude (Anthropic): Writes with a more thoughtful, empathetic tone; good at coding and technical explanations.
4. Mistral: European focused, respects EU data privacy rules, increasingly competitive on quality.

She noted that while many smaller tools exist, they often overlap with these four and rarely add unique value.

Prompt-writing

A large part of the webinar focused on how to talk to AI effectively. Lerch presented a “prompt formula” that she calls a package: each prompt should contain several ingredients.

1. Persona – Tell the AI who it should act as (e.g., “You are an experienced science journalist”).
2. Assignment – State the exact task (“Write a balanced overview of AI tools for journalists”).
3. Context – Provide background information the AI needs (topic details, target audience).
4. Format – Specify the output style (list, table, short paragraph).
5. Goal – Clarify the purpose (“Help me decide which tool to try first”).
6. Extra Details – Any additional constraints (word limit, tone).

Using this structure reduces ambiguity and limits the aforementioned hallucinations. Lerch demonstrated the method with a real example: asking an AI to list experts on electric-vehicle policy and receive the results in a tidy table.

Practical use-cases for journalists

Lerch illustrated several everyday scenarios where AI can save time:

• Finding perspectives – By feeding a controversial topic (e.g., wolf-population quotas in Germany) into an AI, she received a list of stakeholder groups that she had not considered, broadening her coverage.
• Preparing interview questions – A generic prompt can generate a set of tailored questions, which she then refines for each interviewee.
• Locating interview subjects – Using AI to scan public sites such as Reddit, she identified personal stories (e.g., a single mother facing eviction) and extracted concise summaries and links.
• Summarising messy notes – After a phone interview, she copies her handwritten notes into an AI and receives a clean, readable summary.
• Creating visual aids – Some AI tools can turn raw data into charts or even draft PowerPoint slides, speeding up the production of multimedia stories.

Pitfalls and ethical considerations

While enthusiastic, Lerch reminded participants of the risks, such as data privacy, copyright, and bias and misinformation in the results. Journalists should also be wary of tool dependence; over-reliance on a single platform can create a lock-in effect, limiting flexibility.

She encouraged journalists to treat AI as a helper, not a replacement, and to keep a critical eye on every output.

Looking ahead

Lerch concluded that AI will continue to evolve, but the core mission of journalists to provide accurate, fair, and insightful storytelling will stay the same. She urged her peers to experiment, share experiences, and teach newcomers how to harness AI responsibly.