Unlike some of our doomer-ish friends in the writing community, we try to take a balanced view of the artificial intelligence revolution. Indeed, we have noted many positive impacts for our profession — for starters, writers incorporating the tech into their workflows, boosting their productivity, and revving up income streams. Yet, in recent days, we have been struck by a string of darker developments that writers and those who love them should be aware of.
Consider Grammarly’s “expert review feature,” as reported on by The Verge and Wired. Grammarly’s pitch noted that the feature can “sharpen your message through the lens of industry-relevant perspectives” including options ranging from The Verge editors to notable figures like Neil deGrasse Tyson and Stephen King. But here’s the kicker: Grammarly didn’t secure authorized participation from any of the experts, showcasing yet another blatant overreach in the rush to utilize AI tech without proper guardrails or permissions. Clearly, Grammarly subscribed to the old adage that it’s better to beg for forgiveness than ask for permission. With a class action lawsuit in the works, the company has since walked back the feature.
Next up, a story out of the UK, where staff journalists from a suite of gaming publications acquired by an SEO agency suddenly found themselves fired…only to be replaced by two “writers” whose bios and content were entirely AI generated. Despite their biographies professing a love of gaming culture and sports betting, it was quickly revealed — by a quick AI check, no less — that these “writers” aren’t human at all, but rather AI creations. Needless to say, the former staff journalists are furious, and online commenters have called out the hate and switch and the gaming group’s blatant dishonesty.
Even one of the most high-profile and well-intentioned efforts to protect writers’ interests — the Authors Guild’s recently launched Human Authorization Certification program — is raising more questions than answering them. This program was heralded by the Authors Guild as “empowering writers to take control of their professional identity and offering peace of mind for readers who want to support human authors and experience genuine human storytelling.” But as the Guild itself concedes, there’s no vetting mechanism in the certification process, pinning the program to the honor system and thus rendering it mostly meaningless.
These developments reaffirm our nuanced view that AI will continue to be a Pandora’s box of rewards and risks for writers. And it’s our central challenge as a profession to find meaningful ways to maximize the opportunities while minimizing the threats. With that in mind, we have been working on a resource to help ghostwriters and their clients navigate this seismic change together. Watch this space for an announcement about this initiative in the coming weeks.
