Specialist insurer CFC has introduced affirmative AI coverage within its media policy, effective July 30, marking the latest step in a broader programme to embed explicit AI-related wording across its product range.
The update reflects growing use of AI-assisted content creation across media, publishing, marketing and creative services, and is designed to give brokers and policyholders greater certainty over how cover responds to AI-related liability exposures.
Under the revised wording, involvement of AI in media activities does not prevent the policy from responding, meaning the policy can still cover defamation, intellectual property infringement and other media and professional liability claims where AI has contributed to content creation.
CFC has also updated the policy's cyber coverages with affirmative AI language, giving insureds the same level of protection available through the insurer's Cyber Proactive Response (CPR) product, alongside greater clarity on how established cyber triggers apply in an AI context, such as when AI hallucinations or large language model prompts cause unexpected computer systems downtime.
"AI is no longer an emerging technology for media companies. It is already embedded in the way many businesses create, manage and distribute content," said Nick Line (pictured), chief underwriting officer at CFC.
Line said the enhancements were designed to provide clarity on how coverage responds when AI is involved, while also addressing new cyber and privacy exposures arising from AI adoption, describing the update as another example of CFC leading the market as technology reshapes the risk landscape.
With more than 20 years' experience serving media and entertainment businesses, CFC's media policy combines multimedia and professional liability cover, including defamation, intellectual property infringement and contractual liability, with cyber and privacy protection, property and general liability cover, and legal expenses insurance. The affirmative AI language builds on that existing structure rather than forming a standalone product.
The media update completes a programme CFC began in June 2026, when it introduced affirmative AI wording across six other core products, including technology errors and omissions, professional liability, eHealth, intellectual property, management liability and its CPR cyber product.
Line said at the time that AI now sits within day-to-day business operations across every industry and interacts with the same risks insurers have always covered, and that CFC's focus had been on giving clients and brokers clarity rather than relying on implied or silent cover.
CFC's approach reflects a wider divergence playing out across international insurance markets. Insurance Insider has reported that Verisk subsidiary ISO filed AI-related exclusion endorsements in the US in January 2026, with larger carriers including AIG and Berkley following suit across general liability and professional lines.
The London market, by contrast, has been slower to move: the Lloyd's Market Association's head of technical underwriting, David Powell, has said the association is waiting for an instruction from the market before drafting equivalent exclusionary wording.
A Lloyd's Market Association survey of underwriters found professional indemnity to be the line of business with the highest perceived potential impact from AI-related losses, and Lloyd's has flagged AI-related risk within its own innovation risk category, which now accounts for around 5% of the market's overall gross written premium.
Some Lloyd's syndicates have moved toward affirmative cover instead of exclusions, with Chaucer and coverholder Armilla launching a combined cyber and standalone AI liability structure offering aggregate limits of US$25 million or more per organization. Beazley and QBE, both of which write substantial international books, have also introduced AI sublimits within their cyber programmes capping AI-related payouts at around 10% of the total policy limit.
The exposure is not confined to any one jurisdiction. In the UK, both the Law Society and the Bar Council issued guidance on generative AI use in legal practice following a Divisional Court ruling on fabricated case citations, with the Bar Standards Board issuing further guidance in May 2026.
Courts in the US, Canada and Australia have seen comparable disputes involving AI-generated content and citations, underscoring that professional indemnity exposure tied to AI hallucination is a cross-border underwriting concern rather than one specific to a single market.
Set against that backdrop, CFC's decision to embed affirmative AI wording across its entire portfolio, rather than exclude AI-related exposures or leave them to silent cover, positions the insurer distinctly from carriers moving towards exclusionary language, particularly in the US. For brokers advising media, publishing and professional services clients internationally, the divergence between affirmative and exclusionary approaches is likely to become an increasingly important point of comparison at renewal, as underwriters across multiple markets continue to treat professional indemnity as the class most exposed to AI-related claims activity.
