As AI technologies rapidly spread, concerns over the unauthorized use of news articles are becoming increasingly prominent. Chief Cabinet Secretary Minoru Kihara’s statement at a recent press conference—“It is important to advance innovation and risk management simultaneously”—captures the growing tension we have seen emerge over the past several months.
Developing AI models requires large volumes of text data, and news articles naturally tend to be treated as high-quality sources. However, once copyright issues enter the picture, the situation quickly becomes complicated. News organizations have every reason to strongly oppose unauthorized reproduction, as such actions can threaten the very foundation of their businesses. In fact, the protest sent by Kyodo News to the U.S. startup Perplexity, as well as the lawsuits filed in August by Nikkei and Asahi Shimbun, reflect this mounting sense of urgency.
On the other hand, AI developers worry that tighter restrictions on training data could slow technological progress. Search-oriented AI services, in particular, rely heavily on speed and breadth of information; losing access to news data would directly undermine their competitiveness.
What is crucial here is that the debate cannot move forward if framed as a binary choice between “copyright protection” and “innovation.” As Kihara’s comments imply, the realistic path lies in pursuing a balance between the two.
So how can that balance be achieved?
I believe Japan should stop prolonging the debate and begin institutionalizing concrete measures such as the following:
First, the rules governing how AI companies may use news content must be clarified. Contracts should define the conditions and scope of permissible use, and a compensation framework should ensure mutual benefit. Europe is already moving ahead with negotiation models based on “neighboring rights,” and Japan cannot afford to fall behind.
Second, news organizations themselves must rebuild their business models for the AI era. Simply rejecting AI use will not be sustainable. Rather, by proactively leveraging AI to enhance content delivery, analysis, and reader services, they can create entirely new forms of value.
While AI and journalism may appear to be in conflict, they actually have the potential to strengthen each other’s value. For society to move in that direction, transparent discussions among government, industry, and businesses are essential—and Japan must demonstrate its ability to establish effective national-level rules.
Kihara’s remarks represent an important first signal in that process. I intend to continue watching closely to see how Japan designs its legal and institutional frameworks, and how the country shapes the future relationship between AI and journalism.