Publication ethics represents the institutional embodiment of research integrity within academic publishing. Its fundamental goal is to safeguard the authenticity and fairness of scientific outputs. With the rapid development of artificial intelligence generated content (AIGC), the academic publishing ecosystem is undergoing profound transformation. While AIGC offers unprecedented efficiency and innovation, it also introduces new ethical risks, such as the blurring of authorship responsibility, increasingly realistic fabrication of data and images, and the intelligent automation of plagiarism and textual manipulation. These emerging challenges have exposed several weaknesses in China’s academic journal system, including insufficient regulatory coverage, delayed detection mechanisms, and limited accountability tracing in the construction of publication ethics. Taking the AIGC context as the point of departure, this paper systematically analyzes the new characteristics of academic misconduct and the practical dilemmas faced by scholarly journals in ethical governance. It then proposes a three-dimensional pathway for improvement—through institutional, technological, and educational-cultural perspectives. At the institutional level, it is crucial to strengthen alignment with national research integrity policies, refine authorship and disclosure standards, and establish comprehensive systems for detecting misconduct and enforcing accountability. Furthermore, cross-journal and cross-disciplinary collaboration should be promoted to enhance collective governance capabilities and ensure consistent ethical standards across the publishing ecosystem. At the technological level, journals should develop and implement multimodal detection platforms capable of identifying AI-generated or manipulated content in text, data, and images. Pilot projects in high-risk disciplines—such as biomedical sciences, computer vision, and social data analytics—should focus on verification of results and sharing of information on suspected misconduct. The integration of AI-assisted forensic tools and blockchain-based record-keeping may further enhance transparency and traceability throughout the publication process. At the educational and cultural level, differentiated ethical training programs should be implemented for key stakeholders, including graduate students, editors, and peer reviewers. These programs should emphasize the identification of AIGC-related risks, the responsible use of AI tools, and adherence to publication integrity principles. By cultivating a shared culture of ethical awareness and professional accountability, journals can move beyond reactive regulation toward proactive ethical governance. This study argues that only through the synergistic interaction of institutional constraints, technological support, and cultural guidance can the publishing community effectively address the ethical challenges posed by AIGC. This multidimensional approach will not only help preserve the credibility and integrity of academic publishing but also provide sustainable support for the broader construction of a national research integrity system. In the era of intelligent content generation, reinforcing publication ethics is no longer a peripheral concern but a foundational requirement for ensuring that scholarly communication continues to serve truth, transparency, and public trust.