When Joaquín Cuenca Abela first saw DALL-E, he knew his company needed to change. As CEO of Freepik, a platform that started as a search engine for free images and grew into a major provider of illustrations and vectors, he recognized that AI image generation would transform the creative industry.

Keep Going - A Guide to Unlocking Success is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

"I remember DALL-E 1 - it was getting there but not quite. With DALL-E 2, I flipped," Cuenca Abela says. "I realized this technology would keep improving. To some extent, our company could become obsolete."

Try SubMarket, a new tool to advertise in newsletters

Want to tap into newsletter audiences without the usual affiliate hassles? Submarket lets you pay newsletter owners only when their readers actually click your links.

No upfront fees. No complicated codes. Just direct access to engaged newsletter audiences and crystal-clear analytics on every click.

Test it out - create your first link in under 60 seconds.

Rather than resist the change, Freepik embraced it. The company, based in Málaga, Spain, assembled teams to work on AI models and build user-friendly products. They started with a text-to-image generator and gradually expanded their AI capabilities, developing workflows and eventually their own models.

This approach sets Freepik apart from competitors. While Shutterstock and Getty Images opted to work with external partners like OpenAI and NVIDIA, Freepik invested in building internal AI expertise. "They really didn't go themselves into iterating with this tech," Cuenca Abela notes about his competitors.

The pivot seems natural given Freepik's history of innovation. The company began as a vertical search engine for free images, built by three founders including Cuenca Abela, who previously worked at Google. When a major image provider asked them to remove their content, Freepik adapted by creating their own illustrations and vectors based on user search data.

Spend your time selling, not teaching Zoom

CrankWheel is a 10x simpler screen sharing solution, tailor-made for sales professionals. Add a screen sharing presentation to your sales call in 10 seconds flat. Your prospect clicks a link that you send by text message or email and immediately sees your presentation - no download or registration, even on their mobile device.

This business model helped Freepik gain popularity in emerging markets where users often can't afford premium stock images. With traffic levels two to four times higher than traditional stock photo sites, Freepik could offer lower prices while still paying market rates to creators.

On the ethical implications of AI art, Cuenca Abela takes a measured stance. Freepik uses third-party models trained with opt-out policies and is developing its own model using only licensed images. They share revenue with creators when their images are used for AI training, using the same revenue-sharing model as regular downloads.

"If people decide that opt-out is not an acceptable model, there is no AI. There's no ChatGPT, there's nothing," he explains. While acknowledging the current situation looks bleak for many illustrators, he suggests AI might ultimately increase demand for art by making it more accessible.

With over 500 employees today, Freepik's transformation mirrors larger changes in creative industries. As Cuenca Abela points out, the questions raised by AI art are just the beginning. "If you think about how many things AI can do, it's basically all white-collar jobs. We're going to have this conversation on a bigger scale."

Freepik's story shows how companies can adapt to technological disruption - by moving quickly, building internal expertise, and thoughtfully engaging with ethical challenges. As AI continues to reshape creative work, their experience offers valuable lessons for other organizations facing similar transformations.

When Jim and I decided to start Editor-in-Grief, we envisioned it as more than just another media podcast. We wanted to create a space where we could dissect what’s happening in the media—the real story, not the version filtered through PR departments or sanitized for public consumption. It’s a chance to unpack the philosophy, the problems, and the outright absurdities of the industry we’ve been part of for decades. So welcome to the latest episode. Let’s dive into it.

What Are We Doing Here?

I kicked off the episode, as I often do, by questioning what this podcast is really about. Is it a reflection? A philosophical examination? Torture, as Jim so graciously put it? Probably a little bit of everything. Our goal is to shed light on what’s actually happening in the media versus what people think is happening. And yes, crankiness is definitely part of the equation.

One of the big topics we tackled this week was access journalism—you know, that thing where journalists tiptoe around the tough questions to avoid upsetting their sources or peers. It’s a phenomenon rooted in fear, complacency, and the herd mentality that dominates so many newsrooms. Jim and I have seen it all: reporters too scared to ask the hard questions because they don’t want to lose their precious access, beat writers parroting the same narratives, and the resulting stories that are, well, milk toast.

Jim put it best when he said, “The instinct to not stand out is human nature. Journalists aren’t immune to it.” Whether it’s in politics or sports, we see this over and over again—people playing it safe, sticking to the script, and refusing to rock the boat. The result? A cycle where the PR person sets the agenda, and the journalists just go along with it.

Burning Sources and Breaking Ranks

We also dug into the fear of “burning sources,” a phrase that drives me up the wall. If your source is worth anything, they’ll respect that you’re doing your job by asking tough questions. And if they don’t? Well, good riddance. A real journalist finds another way to get the story.

But here’s the thing: when one reporter decides to ask a real question, it upsets the whole ecosystem. The PR person gets mad, the other journalists get annoyed because now they can’t ask their “safe” questions, and suddenly, everyone’s blaming the one person who actually did their job. It’s maddening, but it’s also the reality of modern journalism.

Journalism in the Digital Age: Surviving the Winter

As the media landscape shifts, we’re seeing fewer journalists survive the ongoing layoffs and restructuring. And let’s be honest, the ones who stick around often do so by not rocking the boat. They’ve mastered the art of mediocrity, and that’s what’s rewarded in an industry terrified of upsetting advertisers or readers. It’s a depressing trend, but it’s one we’ve come to expect.

We talked about CNN’s latest round of layoffs—200 journalists gone, replaced by 200 digital roles. It’s the same story we’ve seen play out for years: newspapers going digital-first, cutting costs, and hoping for the best. But does it work? Rarely. The problem isn’t the format; it’s the fear of taking risks, of telling stories that matter instead of chasing clicks.

What Does the Future Look Like?

Jim and I also wrestled with a big question: can we create a truly unbiased, “true” news organization? One where facts are presented without spin, humanity, or bias? Honestly, I’m skeptical. People think they want “truth” in their news, but what they really want is something compelling. A sterile, AI-generated report of events isn’t going to cut it. People crave stories—the humanity, the context, the nuance. Strip that away, and you’re left with something no one wants to read.

At the end of the day, journalism is about more than just reporting facts. It’s about finding the humanity in a story, the little details that make it resonate. Jim summed it up beautifully: “You can make people upset, happy, curious, or inspired, but you can never, ever make them bored.” That’s the essence of good journalism. It’s not about pandering to readers or sources; it’s about telling stories that matter.

Questions for Jim and I? Email john@keepgoingpod.com and we’ll be happy to answer them.

Until next time, this is Editor-in-Grief. Thanks for listening.