About

Nicholas Diakopoulos is a professor in Communication Studies and Computer Science (by courtesy) at Northwestern University. He directs the Computational Journalism Lab and serves as the director of Graduate Studies for the Technology and Social Behavior PhD program. His research focuses on computational journalism, including aspects of automation and algorithms in news production, algorithmic accountability and transparency, and social media in news contexts. He is the author of the award-winning book, Automating the News: How Algorithms are Rewriting the Media, published by Harvard University Press. Diakopoulos received his Ph.D. and M.S. degrees in Computer Science from the School of Interactive Computing at the Georgia Institute of Technology, and his Sc.B. degree in Computer Engineering from Brown University.

Research topics

• Political Science
• Sociology
• Computer Science
• Media studies
• Public relations
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Science
• Data Mining
• Law
• Psychology
• Advertising
• Business
• Social psychology
• Cognitive science
• Internet privacy
• Engineering ethics
• Data science

Selected publications

• "Make It Sound Like a Lawyer Wrote It": Scenarios of Potential Impacts of Generative AI for Legal Conflict Resolution

  Open MIND · 2026-02-27 · 2 citations

  preprintSenior author

  Generative AI (GenAI) tools are transforming critical societal domains, including the legal sector. While these tools create opportunities such as increased efficiency and potential improvements in access to justice, they also present new challenges, such as the risk of inaccurate legal advice and questions about the legitimacy of legal decisions. However, the full impact remains to be seen and ultimately depends on the way GenAI tools are implemented and used by both, legal professionals and citizens. This makes anticipating and managing the positive and negative impacts of GenAI use in the legal domain challenging but also important to guide the digital transformation of the legal sector into a societally desirable direction. In this paper, we set out to explore the spectrum of possible impacts of GenAI in the legal domain, examining how this technology is anticipated being used and the potential implications this might have for the legal sector and society. Using a scenario writing method, we surveyed participants in the EU and US including both citizens and legal professionals about the potential impact of generative AI on legal conflict resolution. Respondents were tasked with writing a narrative drawing on their experience or expertise about a future in which AI is used throughout the legal process. We qualitatively analysed the prevalence of risk and benefit themes, as well as the types of anticipated legal tasks. We then compared these findings based on expertise status (legal experts versus citizens) and regional regulatory background (the EU with the EU AI Act versus the US with an industry self-regulatory approach). Finally, we describe the emerging trade-offs that will affect decision-makers in the legal sector.

  DOI

• Beyond the Byline: Audience Expectations for AI Disclosure in News Media

  Digital Journalism · 2026-04-29

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Algorithmic News Content Personalization and Readers’ Attitudes

  Digital Journalism · 2026-02-25 · 1 citations

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Beyond the Byline: Audience Expectations for AI Disclosure in News Media

  Figshare · 2026-04-29

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  As generative AI becomes increasingly common in news media, newsrooms are trying to find the most effective and reliable ways to communicate this AI use to audiences. This paper aims to unravel audience perspectives regarding the purpose of AI transparency, motivations for desiring transparency, expectations of journalists using AI, and perceptions of different AI labeling approaches to guide the implementation of effective and responsible AI disclosure. Through in-depth interviews with a sample of news consumers in the U.S (<i>N</i> = 20), we find that audiences are less concerned with the technicalities of generative AI content creation but rather, based on their expectations of journalists, they value labeling that signals human-AI collaboration and visible human oversight. By focusing on audience expectations and perceptions, we contribute practical and theoretical insights to the literature on AI labeling.

  PublisherDOI

• AI Hype in Journalism: Visibility, Power, and the Politics of Media Narratives

  Digital Journalism · 2026-02-07

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• “Helping Me Versus Doing It for Me”: Designing for Agency in LLM-Infused Writing Tools for Science Journalism

  2026-04-13 · 1 citations

  articleOpen access

  Journalists rely on their agency—the ability to exercise independent judgment in alignment with their values—to fulfill their democratic social role. In this study, we investigate how LLM-infused writing tools reshape journalists’ agency in editorial decision making. In interviews with 20 science journalists, we presented four hypothetical LLM-infused writing tools representing a range of possible design space configurations. We find that journalists are selectively willing to cede control: they view AI that gathers information or offers feedback as supporting their efficiency by automating execution while leaving decision making intact. In contrast, they see AI that generates core ideas or drafts as a threat to their autonomy, skill development, self-fulfillment, and professional relationships. This sensitivity extends to seemingly automatable tasks such as manipulating writing voice with AI, which are seen as reducing opportunities for reflection and critical thinking. We discuss the implications of these findings for design that preserves journalistic agency in the moment, and over the long term.

  PublisherDOI

• Trade-Offs in Deploying Legal AI: Insights from a Public Opinion Study to Guide AI Risk Management

  Open MIND · 2026-02-10 · 1 citations

  preprint

  Generative AI tools are increasingly used for legal tasks, including legal research, drafting documents, and even for legal decision-making. As for other purposes, the use of GenAI in the legal domain comes with various risks and benefits that needs to be properly managed to ensure implementation in a way that serves public values and protect human rights. While the EU mandates risk assessment and audits before market introduction for some use cases (e.g., use by judges for administration of justice) other use cases do not fall under the AI Acts' high-risk classifications (e.g., use by citizens for legal consultation or drafting documents). Further, current risk management practices prioritize expert judgment on risk factor identification and prioritization without a corresponding legal requirement to consult with affected communities. Seeing the societal importance of the legal sector and the potentially transformative impact of GenAI in this sector, the acceptability and legitimacy of GenAI solutions also depends on public perceptions and a better understanding of the risks and benefits citizens associated with the use of AI in the legal sector. As a response, this papers presents data from a representative sample of German citizens (n=488) outlining citizens' perspectives on the use of GenAI for two legal tasks: legal consultation and legal mediation. Concretely, we i) systematically map risks and benefit factors for both legal tasks, ii) describe predictors that influence risk acceptance of the use of GenAI for those tasks, and iii) highlight emerging trade-off themes that citizens engage in when weighing up risk acceptability. Our results provides an empirical overview of citizens' concerns regarding risk management of GenAI for the legal domain, foregrounding critical themes that complement current risk assessment procedures.

  DOI

• Beyond the Byline: Audience Expectations for AI Disclosure in News Media

  Figshare · 2026-04-29

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  As generative AI becomes increasingly common in news media, newsrooms are trying to find the most effective and reliable ways to communicate this AI use to audiences. This paper aims to unravel audience perspectives regarding the purpose of AI transparency, motivations for desiring transparency, expectations of journalists using AI, and perceptions of different AI labeling approaches to guide the implementation of effective and responsible AI disclosure. Through in-depth interviews with a sample of news consumers in the U.S (<i>N</i> = 20), we find that audiences are less concerned with the technicalities of generative AI content creation but rather, based on their expectations of journalists, they value labeling that signals human-AI collaboration and visible human oversight. By focusing on audience expectations and perceptions, we contribute practical and theoretical insights to the literature on AI labeling.

  PublisherDOI

• "Make It Sound Like a Lawyer Wrote It": Scenarios of Potential Impacts of Generative AI for Legal Conflict Resolution

  ArXiv.org · 2026-02-27

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  Generative AI (GenAI) tools are transforming critical societal domains, including the legal sector. While these tools create opportunities such as increased efficiency and potential improvements in access to justice, they also present new challenges, such as the risk of inaccurate legal advice and questions about the legitimacy of legal decisions. However, the full impact remains to be seen and ultimately depends on the way GenAI tools are implemented and used by both, legal professionals and citizens. This makes anticipating and managing the positive and negative impacts of GenAI use in the legal domain challenging but also important to guide the digital transformation of the legal sector into a societally desirable direction. In this paper, we set out to explore the spectrum of possible impacts of GenAI in the legal domain, examining how this technology is anticipated being used and the potential implications this might have for the legal sector and society. Using a scenario writing method, we surveyed participants in the EU and US including both citizens and legal professionals about the potential impact of generative AI on legal conflict resolution. Respondents were tasked with writing a narrative drawing on their experience or expertise about a future in which AI is used throughout the legal process. We qualitatively analysed the prevalence of risk and benefit themes, as well as the types of anticipated legal tasks. We then compared these findings based on expertise status (legal experts versus citizens) and regional regulatory background (the EU with the EU AI Act versus the US with an industry self-regulatory approach). Finally, we describe the emerging trade-offs that will affect decision-makers in the legal sector.

  PublisherOA PDF

• Trade-Offs in Deploying Legal AI: Insights from a Public Opinion Study to Guide AI Risk Management

  ArXiv.org · 2026-02-10

  articleOpen access

  Generative AI tools are increasingly used for legal tasks, including legal research, drafting documents, and even for legal decision-making. As for other purposes, the use of GenAI in the legal domain comes with various risks and benefits that needs to be properly managed to ensure implementation in a way that serves public values and protect human rights. While the EU mandates risk assessment and audits before market introduction for some use cases (e.g., use by judges for administration of justice) other use cases do not fall under the AI Acts' high-risk classifications (e.g., use by citizens for legal consultation or drafting documents). Further, current risk management practices prioritize expert judgment on risk factor identification and prioritization without a corresponding legal requirement to consult with affected communities. Seeing the societal importance of the legal sector and the potentially transformative impact of GenAI in this sector, the acceptability and legitimacy of GenAI solutions also depends on public perceptions and a better understanding of the risks and benefits citizens associated with the use of AI in the legal sector. As a response, this papers presents data from a representative sample of German citizens (n=488) outlining citizens' perspectives on the use of GenAI for two legal tasks: legal consultation and legal mediation. Concretely, we i) systematically map risks and benefit factors for both legal tasks, ii) describe predictors that influence risk acceptance of the use of GenAI for those tasks, and iii) highlight emerging trade-off themes that citizens engage in when weighing up risk acceptability. Our results provides an empirical overview of citizens' concerns regarding risk management of GenAI for the legal domain, foregrounding critical themes that complement current risk assessment procedures.

  PublisherOA PDF

Recent grants

• CAREER: Computational Journalism: Integrating Algorithms and People in the Production of News Information

  NSF · $566k · 2019–2025

• CHS: Small: Assessing the Role of Platform Algorithms in Shaping News Attention

  NSF · $500k · 2017–2021

Frequent coauthors

• Caelainn Barr

  King's College London

  14 shared

• Jonathan Stray

  14 shared

• Aaron M. Williams

  Vanderbilt University Medical Center

  14 shared

• Aika Rey

  University of California, Berkeley

  13 shared

• Mary Lynn Young

  Allegheny General Hospital

  13 shared

• Raúl Alejandro Luna Sánchez

  Universidad Veracruzana

  13 shared

• Liliana Bounegru

  13 shared

• Pınar Dağ

  13 shared

Education

• Ph.D., Communication

  Carnegie Mellon University

  2013

• M.S., Communication

  Carnegie Mellon University

  2009

• B.A., Political Science

  University of California, Berkeley

  2006

Awards & honors

• author of the award-winning book, Automating the News: How A…