Beautiful piece, Martha, a passionate defense of voice during a time of peril for children, especially. Nick and I appreciate your shoutout and will continue to do our level best to safeguard authenticity and voice in our shared work. Real texts speak in reality to real people. This must be understood deeply and taught.
Thanks, Terry. The outraged response of so many writers last week was good for a few minutes of media soup, but somehow the big issues keep floating out of sight. I agree that children will be the most affected by AI interventions, which both worries and saddens me. The notion of finding your writing voice gets flung around a lot and can mean many things, but I think it comes down to giving space to inner life. Sometimes it's as if technologists and company executives don't hear the same frequency humanists hear.
Way to make use of your summer setback to give us a forceful analogy for occasions when the quicker solution of tech does not support our long-term human goals. Glad to hear you’re on your feet. I appreciate the Harari video and the way you make this about writing and also about the larger alarm.
I'm glad to be back on my feet, too, Tara, and I'm also glad my analogy worked :-) When I think about why we write or dig into coming up with a voice, I think most about making an individual imprint on the world, just as we each have our own walking gait.
Harari has a new book coming out that addresses the threat of AI, and it's good he and others with big audiences keep pushing why this matters: to personal storytelling, yes, but also to the fabric of democracy and human conversation.
I was pretty appalled at NaNoWriMo's embrace of AI and its justification in terms of ableism, whatever that is, and classism, the relevance of which I don't get. However, I did see an article somewhere justifying the use of AI for some people. Not sure where the article is now, but I suppose that could be a valiud argument in some circumstances. I've been experimenting a lot with AI, and I was delighted to discover its "creative" writing is cr*p, which means that I am unlikely to lose work to it any time soon. However, isn't bad at producing a load of ideas very quickly, so I suppose it could be used to counteract writer's block. However, I prefer to use Oulipo techniques (constraints).
Terry, you're right to point out the nuances here, because some writers do find AI useful, and most of us are already employing nongenerative AI for autocorrect, transcription, or translation. The issue with NaNoWriMo was the way they justified their position and its lack of transparency. In fact, they blew the opportunity to have a real conversation about AI use for writers. They could have presented different points of view on their platform, rather than leaping in to assume that whole classes of people need "help."
I like how you sharpened the point, Tara—the quick and easy solution comes into conflict with humanity. We have a history as a species of doing this very thing, take the easy way out and then pay the price. Lead pipes, for example. The Romans started using lead because it was malleable and durable. We are still giving poor children water from lead pipes. Asbestos is another, more recent tool. Of course, nuclear weapons sort of take the cake. There is always a paradox—water or poison? a house or a burning structure? peace or annihilation? This is why people need to think more carefully about AI in writing practices. Don’t drink this water but that water is ok.
Great article, Martha! Thank you for the shout-out. This tech scares me, especially watching my tiny great-niece and nephew, whose childhood is so different from mine, 60 years ago - so much has changed in the last 25 years. What will their adult lives be like? Especially if their world is run by AI algorithms that favour profit over anything else, because it is only profit that drives this tech, in my opinion.
It scares me, too, Elizabeth. The capacity to infiltrate and influence the nooks and crannies of daily life is well beyond any surveillance device we’ve faced. The possibilities are endless which is why the profit motive must be brought to heel. K12 is on the front lines right now. Resistance to AI threatens to short circuit the new expertise schools need to understand how to teach safe uses of a dangerous tool.
I totally agree with your approach, as in your comment above: “Real texts speak in reality to real people. This must be understood deeply and taught.” This tech is here - insidious and malign, if not confronted and examined with clear vision. I still dislike it on all levels, and wish we could turn back the clock - but your comment makes me realize that hiding from it will do greater harm. It’s another level of online safety, and educators must be empowered to understand it in order to guide those on the front line.
Fortunately, there is an army of university types in AI, cognitive science, and computational linguistics who are looking at AI dispassionately. I heard a presentation about AI from the textbook industry that straddled the line between altruism and the profit motive in a troubling way. I don’t understand the algorithms well enough to get involved at that level, but it is very clear that AI if left to the winds of fortune or the whims of Elon Musk and Bill Gates and Sam from Open AI will ultimately downgrade public schools. The affluent schools will be ok as Khan Academy has proven. If we lose our commitment to democratic schools, we will be on a slippery slope to a dictatorship. From this perspective AI couldn’t have come at a worse time—on the heels of COVID. It also underscores the need for educators to pass through the grief stage quickly and emerge with clear heads and a collaborative spirit. All hands on deck.
Fascinating, thank you. And the point about the paper notebooks rings so true. In fact, just in writing this, I'm reminded that a paper notebook appears at the start of Orwell's 1984, when he was only imagining a more technological future.
Thanks, Maria — and yes, it is so odd to think about paper notebooks becoming a bastion for private writing, but I think this matters. The digital platforms we're on are voracious and monetizing what they see us doing and writing about.
I don't know, the entire premise behind NaNoWriMo is to write 50,000 words in the month of November, so why does anyone need to do that only under their umbrella? Any group could make plans to do the same and hang around to encourage each other.
A big part of the encouragement comes because we assume all writers are doing it on their own, without AI or outside editors. Because that's the way it should be.
I think NaNoWriMo's days may be numbered now, and they don't seem to realize they did it to themselves.
Ramona, I suspect other writing challenges led by other groups will arise. As somebody who used to run a small literary nonprofit, I'm even a bit sympathetic to how missteps by volunteers or other far-flung staffers can run out of control fast. But when NaNoWriMo doubled down on its AI position without revealing who their "team" was and no credible evidence or sources to support their position, they tanked in my eyes. They (whoever "they" is) may not have realized what they'd done, but that's just not acceptable for an organization that's supposed to be supporting writers, who at their best search for clarity and precision.
I think the old appeal of the November challenge was the idea that so many writers were doing it at the same time and could support each other via social media. It's a Web 2.0 thing with the feel of some TikTok challenges in recent years, and I considered it a benign way to provide community support for writing. But once AI comes on board, it's no longer a writing challenge. The damage done to how we think about the value of writing is the continuing problem here.
I've already see one or two, well, not exactly announcements, but people mentioning that they were going to be spending November writing in informal groups, with the implication that others interested in being part of such a group could message them.
You are a passionate voice on this issue. Since you mentioned West Wing, i.e., Aaron Sorkin, , "We need you on that wall." Who is your favorite WW character? Mine is Toby. My mother loved Leo.
Thanks, David — and The West Wing! I like all those characters (except Martin Sheen is getting a tiresome as the president, partly because, through the lens of 2024, he seems too good to be true). But my absolute favorite is C.J. Cregg, the press secretary. Allison Janney is just so fabulous :-)
That was my guess as to your favorite! Who can't love CJ? I know what you mean about the fantasy president. But he did hide his MS so he has that imperfection. Plus Leo and Toby call him out reasonably often for not having the courage of his convictions.
Great piece and as usual very thoughtful and thought provoking. (And thanks for the shout out:) You know I consider myself a "working copywriter" so obviously it's a HUGE discussion. The way I read your piece was from the angle of creativity. It's a perilous path when we allow AI tools to serve us several ideas rather than working through that process ourselves following our internal, creative GPS.
From that POV I whole heartedly agree. I just read someone's book and he compares AI tools to an "infinitely hardworking but only reasonably competent assistant." You have to understand the material you're asking it for well enough to be able to spot the blatantly false factual mistakes the tools make. Because they are language tools that are programed to give you an answer based on what it should statistically sound like. There's no reflection or thinking involved, it's simply regurgitating a data set and giving you the most likely answers. The answers you get depend on the specificity and details of the questions you asked.
All that to say - there is no AI tool that can replace our own thinking and reflecting, which is the kernel of our creativity.
But it's here and we're all using everyday whether we want to admit it or not. Grammarly, auto correct on your phone (perfect example of getting things SO WRONG!) and a hundred other things we're barely aware of since November 2022.
So I feel like we need to teach ourselves and learn from our children how to use the tools. And teach our children about reflection, thinking things through, and asking better questions. This is how we find our voice.
It's not a black and white situation we're in. While I'm working with clients and interviewing for jobs, I need explain how I use the tools, and then stand behind my own ideas, persuasive copy, while also using AI tools to speed up the process of certain things an editorial assistant would do for me.
I feel like this explains right where I am today. Because the only stand I can take is that I use my own knowledge, creativity and expertise to make the tools work for me. (Sounds like a bit of cop out when I write it here!) But that's what I'm doing my best to do and educate myself as much as I can. It's like a whole new skill set for my line of work.
I'm so glad you're back on your feet! It must have been agony.
Jen, thanks so much for nodding to all the shades of gray in this discussion, and it doesn't sound to me like you're copping out. You're addressing the reality of your work life. As I've continued researching generative AI, testing it, and interviewing writers and linguists, I've become increasingly convinced that the problem areas do involve creative writing, authentic voice, and self-expression. As AI keeps steamrolling forward, I think the challenge comes in distinguishing when it's helpful for communications professionals and when it undercuts personal creativity and authenticity. The tech companies are driving public discourse, which is a very big problem, given how badly they want to make money. That's why the battleground really is in K-12 schools right now. Kids need AI guardrails, just as they need media literacy. Anyway, I'd love to chat with you about this in more detail sometime.
Absolutely, I'd love to chat more. Especially about the tech companies driving the public discourse. That's absolutely true because most people don't do their own research but instead listen to the loudest - and in this case - the only voices. Always up for a discussion around creative writing, authentic voice and self-expression.
Sorry to hear about all your pain Martha. I hope you’ll feel better soon. And this piece, as everything you write is beautiful, passionate and so so needed! Sending you a big hug.
Finally, I have come back to this superb piece to read at my own pace. I love it so much. Reading your words always helps me feel re-connected to a writing community.
Beautiful piece, Martha, a passionate defense of voice during a time of peril for children, especially. Nick and I appreciate your shoutout and will continue to do our level best to safeguard authenticity and voice in our shared work. Real texts speak in reality to real people. This must be understood deeply and taught.
Thanks, Terry. The outraged response of so many writers last week was good for a few minutes of media soup, but somehow the big issues keep floating out of sight. I agree that children will be the most affected by AI interventions, which both worries and saddens me. The notion of finding your writing voice gets flung around a lot and can mean many things, but I think it comes down to giving space to inner life. Sometimes it's as if technologists and company executives don't hear the same frequency humanists hear.
Way to make use of your summer setback to give us a forceful analogy for occasions when the quicker solution of tech does not support our long-term human goals. Glad to hear you’re on your feet. I appreciate the Harari video and the way you make this about writing and also about the larger alarm.
I'm glad to be back on my feet, too, Tara, and I'm also glad my analogy worked :-) When I think about why we write or dig into coming up with a voice, I think most about making an individual imprint on the world, just as we each have our own walking gait.
Harari has a new book coming out that addresses the threat of AI, and it's good he and others with big audiences keep pushing why this matters: to personal storytelling, yes, but also to the fabric of democracy and human conversation.
I was pretty appalled at NaNoWriMo's embrace of AI and its justification in terms of ableism, whatever that is, and classism, the relevance of which I don't get. However, I did see an article somewhere justifying the use of AI for some people. Not sure where the article is now, but I suppose that could be a valiud argument in some circumstances. I've been experimenting a lot with AI, and I was delighted to discover its "creative" writing is cr*p, which means that I am unlikely to lose work to it any time soon. However, isn't bad at producing a load of ideas very quickly, so I suppose it could be used to counteract writer's block. However, I prefer to use Oulipo techniques (constraints).
Terry, you're right to point out the nuances here, because some writers do find AI useful, and most of us are already employing nongenerative AI for autocorrect, transcription, or translation. The issue with NaNoWriMo was the way they justified their position and its lack of transparency. In fact, they blew the opportunity to have a real conversation about AI use for writers. They could have presented different points of view on their platform, rather than leaping in to assume that whole classes of people need "help."
I agree, and also about the lack of transparency. I found that very disappointing.
I like how you sharpened the point, Tara—the quick and easy solution comes into conflict with humanity. We have a history as a species of doing this very thing, take the easy way out and then pay the price. Lead pipes, for example. The Romans started using lead because it was malleable and durable. We are still giving poor children water from lead pipes. Asbestos is another, more recent tool. Of course, nuclear weapons sort of take the cake. There is always a paradox—water or poison? a house or a burning structure? peace or annihilation? This is why people need to think more carefully about AI in writing practices. Don’t drink this water but that water is ok.
Great article, Martha! Thank you for the shout-out. This tech scares me, especially watching my tiny great-niece and nephew, whose childhood is so different from mine, 60 years ago - so much has changed in the last 25 years. What will their adult lives be like? Especially if their world is run by AI algorithms that favour profit over anything else, because it is only profit that drives this tech, in my opinion.
You're preaching to the converted, Elizabeth. The algorithms already favor profit and influence, leading to a false appearance of consensus.
It scares me, too, Elizabeth. The capacity to infiltrate and influence the nooks and crannies of daily life is well beyond any surveillance device we’ve faced. The possibilities are endless which is why the profit motive must be brought to heel. K12 is on the front lines right now. Resistance to AI threatens to short circuit the new expertise schools need to understand how to teach safe uses of a dangerous tool.
I totally agree with your approach, as in your comment above: “Real texts speak in reality to real people. This must be understood deeply and taught.” This tech is here - insidious and malign, if not confronted and examined with clear vision. I still dislike it on all levels, and wish we could turn back the clock - but your comment makes me realize that hiding from it will do greater harm. It’s another level of online safety, and educators must be empowered to understand it in order to guide those on the front line.
Fortunately, there is an army of university types in AI, cognitive science, and computational linguistics who are looking at AI dispassionately. I heard a presentation about AI from the textbook industry that straddled the line between altruism and the profit motive in a troubling way. I don’t understand the algorithms well enough to get involved at that level, but it is very clear that AI if left to the winds of fortune or the whims of Elon Musk and Bill Gates and Sam from Open AI will ultimately downgrade public schools. The affluent schools will be ok as Khan Academy has proven. If we lose our commitment to democratic schools, we will be on a slippery slope to a dictatorship. From this perspective AI couldn’t have come at a worse time—on the heels of COVID. It also underscores the need for educators to pass through the grief stage quickly and emerge with clear heads and a collaborative spirit. All hands on deck.
Take care of yourself Martha. You are needed. There can't be an AI Martha. Why? As Dr Seuss says, there's no one youer than you : )
Awwww :-)
Fascinating, thank you. And the point about the paper notebooks rings so true. In fact, just in writing this, I'm reminded that a paper notebook appears at the start of Orwell's 1984, when he was only imagining a more technological future.
Am so glad that you are back on your feet!!
Thanks, Maria — and yes, it is so odd to think about paper notebooks becoming a bastion for private writing, but I think this matters. The digital platforms we're on are voracious and monetizing what they see us doing and writing about.
I don't know, the entire premise behind NaNoWriMo is to write 50,000 words in the month of November, so why does anyone need to do that only under their umbrella? Any group could make plans to do the same and hang around to encourage each other.
A big part of the encouragement comes because we assume all writers are doing it on their own, without AI or outside editors. Because that's the way it should be.
I think NaNoWriMo's days may be numbered now, and they don't seem to realize they did it to themselves.
Ramona, I suspect other writing challenges led by other groups will arise. As somebody who used to run a small literary nonprofit, I'm even a bit sympathetic to how missteps by volunteers or other far-flung staffers can run out of control fast. But when NaNoWriMo doubled down on its AI position without revealing who their "team" was and no credible evidence or sources to support their position, they tanked in my eyes. They (whoever "they" is) may not have realized what they'd done, but that's just not acceptable for an organization that's supposed to be supporting writers, who at their best search for clarity and precision.
I think the old appeal of the November challenge was the idea that so many writers were doing it at the same time and could support each other via social media. It's a Web 2.0 thing with the feel of some TikTok challenges in recent years, and I considered it a benign way to provide community support for writing. But once AI comes on board, it's no longer a writing challenge. The damage done to how we think about the value of writing is the continuing problem here.
I've already see one or two, well, not exactly announcements, but people mentioning that they were going to be spending November writing in informal groups, with the implication that others interested in being part of such a group could message them.
Martha,
You are a passionate voice on this issue. Since you mentioned West Wing, i.e., Aaron Sorkin, , "We need you on that wall." Who is your favorite WW character? Mine is Toby. My mother loved Leo.
Thanks, David — and The West Wing! I like all those characters (except Martin Sheen is getting a tiresome as the president, partly because, through the lens of 2024, he seems too good to be true). But my absolute favorite is C.J. Cregg, the press secretary. Allison Janney is just so fabulous :-)
That was my guess as to your favorite! Who can't love CJ? I know what you mean about the fantasy president. But he did hide his MS so he has that imperfection. Plus Leo and Toby call him out reasonably often for not having the courage of his convictions.
Have you ever seen this Sorkin parody?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzlQTeUzC4s
Yes, my own personality is basically a cross between C.J. and Toby, my other favorite character. That Seth Meyers parody is funny!
Hey Martha,
Great piece and as usual very thoughtful and thought provoking. (And thanks for the shout out:) You know I consider myself a "working copywriter" so obviously it's a HUGE discussion. The way I read your piece was from the angle of creativity. It's a perilous path when we allow AI tools to serve us several ideas rather than working through that process ourselves following our internal, creative GPS.
From that POV I whole heartedly agree. I just read someone's book and he compares AI tools to an "infinitely hardworking but only reasonably competent assistant." You have to understand the material you're asking it for well enough to be able to spot the blatantly false factual mistakes the tools make. Because they are language tools that are programed to give you an answer based on what it should statistically sound like. There's no reflection or thinking involved, it's simply regurgitating a data set and giving you the most likely answers. The answers you get depend on the specificity and details of the questions you asked.
All that to say - there is no AI tool that can replace our own thinking and reflecting, which is the kernel of our creativity.
But it's here and we're all using everyday whether we want to admit it or not. Grammarly, auto correct on your phone (perfect example of getting things SO WRONG!) and a hundred other things we're barely aware of since November 2022.
So I feel like we need to teach ourselves and learn from our children how to use the tools. And teach our children about reflection, thinking things through, and asking better questions. This is how we find our voice.
It's not a black and white situation we're in. While I'm working with clients and interviewing for jobs, I need explain how I use the tools, and then stand behind my own ideas, persuasive copy, while also using AI tools to speed up the process of certain things an editorial assistant would do for me.
I feel like this explains right where I am today. Because the only stand I can take is that I use my own knowledge, creativity and expertise to make the tools work for me. (Sounds like a bit of cop out when I write it here!) But that's what I'm doing my best to do and educate myself as much as I can. It's like a whole new skill set for my line of work.
I'm so glad you're back on your feet! It must have been agony.
Jen, thanks so much for nodding to all the shades of gray in this discussion, and it doesn't sound to me like you're copping out. You're addressing the reality of your work life. As I've continued researching generative AI, testing it, and interviewing writers and linguists, I've become increasingly convinced that the problem areas do involve creative writing, authentic voice, and self-expression. As AI keeps steamrolling forward, I think the challenge comes in distinguishing when it's helpful for communications professionals and when it undercuts personal creativity and authenticity. The tech companies are driving public discourse, which is a very big problem, given how badly they want to make money. That's why the battleground really is in K-12 schools right now. Kids need AI guardrails, just as they need media literacy. Anyway, I'd love to chat with you about this in more detail sometime.
Absolutely, I'd love to chat more. Especially about the tech companies driving the public discourse. That's absolutely true because most people don't do their own research but instead listen to the loudest - and in this case - the only voices. Always up for a discussion around creative writing, authentic voice and self-expression.
Sorry to hear about all your pain Martha. I hope you’ll feel better soon. And this piece, as everything you write is beautiful, passionate and so so needed! Sending you a big hug.
I'm sending you a big hug back :-)
Finally, I have come back to this superb piece to read at my own pace. I love it so much. Reading your words always helps me feel re-connected to a writing community.
Thanks so much, Wendy. I appreciate your support, and I do feel committed to this idea of a writing community :-)