Every agency just hired an 'AI Lead'. Most of the press releases don't explain why.

The trade press has been running a lot of "agency X announces new AI lead" stories. Almost all of them are written to the same template, and almost none of them tell the reader what the agency actually thinks AI changes about agency work.

The hire is news. The position is more interesting news. Most of the releases skip the second part and lose the better story.

There are three versions of the same announcement landing in editor inboxes right now:

The job title version. "Agency X is pleased to announce the appointment of Y as Head of AI." Background details on Y. Quote from the CEO welcoming Y. A line about the agency's "commitment to innovation." This is the version every release defaults to. Editors run it as a 80-word news brief and move on.

The structural version. Same hire, but the lede explains what AI work the hire is responsible for that didn't exist as a function inside the agency a year ago. What is the new function? Who does it report to? Which existing roles does it sit alongside or above? This version contains actual news about how the agency is structured to do AI work. It runs as a 300-word piece with an editorial line.

The position version. Same hire, same structure, but the announcement leads with the agency's view: here's what we think AI changes about the brief, the team mix, the rate card or the deliverable. The hire is the evidence for the position. This version sometimes runs as a feature with a follow-up call from the editor.

Most agencies are sending version one. The hire is real, the function is interesting, and the position is defensible - but the release is announcing only the job title.

The fix isn't a longer release. It's the lede.

If you can't write a sentence that explains why this person, in this function, signals a position your agency holds - the hire is news your agency doesn't yet know how to talk about, and the announcement should wait until it does.

Hiring an AI lead is a position. Treating the hire as a thing to put in the boilerplate misses the only part editors actually want to write about.