This would be an improvement in my book.

I'm a data journalist, and I use AI in some of my work (data processing, classification, OCR, etc.). I always disclose it in a "Methodology" section in the story. I wouldn't trust any reporting that didn't disclose the use of AI, and if an outlet slapped a disclaimer on their entire site, I wouldn't trust that outlet.

So every time a reporter researches something and does a Google search and Gemini results pop up now AI use has to be added to the methodology section and basically 100% of all articles have the "AI use" label attached.

Yes, just the same as I would expect an encyclopedia reference called out for not being a primary source of a declared fact.

Yes because it would tell me immediately that the reporter can be safely ignored.

If they use the information from the AI summary without checking, then definitely, they'd be a rubbish reporter.

Or

Step 1: those outlets that actually do the work see an increase in subscribers.

Alternative timeline

Step 2.5: 'unlike those news outlets, all our work is verified by humans'

Step 3: work as intended.