Creative Authorship and Authenticity in the GenAI Age
GenAI Ethical Considerations Part 2
What is it about Generative AI that stirs up such passionate arguments from both sides of the creative writing house? The concerns are genuine, though in my opinion, somewhat ill-informed.
I’ll write about the first two of the five discussion points raised in last week’s newsletter. I’ll attempt to present the arguments from both sides while making it clear where I stand. If you think I’ve missed anything, let me know by commenting. Forgive me if I fail to present the anti-AI sentiments fairly. I’ve done my best, but it’s challenging for an AI-positive writer like me.
I would usually place an AI-generated image here. But bearing in mind the subject matter, I thought it best to leave it out this week. Probably next week as well.
It looks awful without a feature image. Just for completeness, here is one I generated earlier
Authorship
For much of my life, I assumed that being an author meant sitting in a quiet space for 12 hours every day for several months, crafting the next novel. The words flowed from the author’s mind directly to the page. Only in the last decade have I realized the truth of writing; it’s difficult and often frustrating, leading many beginners to give up and return to a more comfortable passive consumer lifestyle.
Writing is a lonely existence for much of the time, even if you enjoy the unrestrained support of friends and family. If you are fortunate, you may have found a supportive writing community or group to help you push through the difficult times. But what if you are alone and don’t have a supportive network in place? What then? You must find the resolve to face the daily struggles from within yourself.
In the last few years, AI has aided the lonely writer, especially Generative AI. Since ChatGPT burst onto the scene in November 2022, the creative world has been turned on its head; the impacts of GenAI across all creative disciplines have been felt and are growing with each new feature release. Unethical individuals have jumped onto the bandwagon on mass, wringing their greedy paws in delight at the prospect of a quick and easy buck.
What does this mean for authorship? Can these unscrupulous people be seen as creative? From a creative’s perspective, the answer is an unequivocal no; they are simply profiting with no thought or care for the disruption they cause. It’s all about the money.
On the other side of the coin, there are many ethical ways to use GenAI in the creative process while remaining a creative person, the driver of the creativity engine. Primarily due to the aforementioned profiteers, this has impacted how the concept of authorship is viewed.
The purists insist that any use of AI, at any point in the creative process, dilutes or even eliminates the creative writer’s right to claim authorship of a piece of work. This point of view is understandable but ignores the obvious source of the work, the human driving the process. I agree with the purists, but only to a certain extent, as there are ethical ways to use these tools without impacting the claim of authorship.
Today, we can easily use GenAI to generate or rewrite anything from a single paragraph to an entire piece of work, from short-form non-fiction articles to whole novels. They can quickly produce content in the voice and style of almost any writer whose work has been included in the AI training data—more worries for the creative, more unethical ways to corrupt the industry.
With all of this in mind, we must ask ourselves: at what point does AI stop being a useful tool and start being a co-author? I experiment continuously in my writing process, and honestly, it has been tempting to use AI-generated text as is.
For example, I fed last week’s newsletter to Anthropic’s Claude and asked it to generate a 300-word piece for each of the first two discussion points: Authorship and Authenticity. Within seconds, it pumped out 600 words that could have been used immediately for this week’s article. But what would have been the point? Not to mention the irony of an AI discussing the ethical use of AI. It was helpful regarding the structure and the salient points to be covered, but I haven’t used a single generated sentence.
Authenticity
For me, AI takes on the role of a sounding board, which, for others, may be a supportive family, friend, or writer’s group. It is my writing assistant, nothing more. The only parts of any of my newsletters that are 100% AI-generated are the feature images I use generated by DALL-E. For the rest, it’s just me and my single-finger typing.
This brings us nicely to the second point, authenticity, which is closely intertwined with the concept of authorship. Together, these two represent the biggest fears the creative writing community has about AI. The feeling is that any AI-assisted creative writing means that the named author isn’t a ‘real’ writer, that the produced work has no soul and should be dismissed out of hand as computer-generated garbage.
From the get-go with my GenAI experimentation, I’ve never been afraid of the generated content. Maybe that says a lot about my professional background as an engineer. Technology has never been seen as something to fear but rather to embrace wholeheartedly.
Perhaps those opposed to AI are thinking more emotionally than logically. It is easier to attack something you fear instead of trying to understand and come to terms with it. Whatever it is, be it technology, other cultures, or alternative lifestyles. From this perspective, it’s understandable why it’s so easy to consider AI-assisted writing inauthentic. Reality, however, is never black or white.
Generative AI is not conspiring to destroy our humanity or identity as creatives. AI can and is used more to enhance and nurture than to destroy or denigrate the value of our work. When we use these tools responsibly and ethically, they help us produce valuable work, and that work, the themes, emotions, and life lessons, defines our authentic creative self.
Here is another example that many would not consider AI-assisted writing. When this draft is complete, after I’ve read through it once or twice and manually corrected typos, omissions, and structural issues, I’ll run it through Grammarly, which invariably picks up things I’ve missed. Not every suggestion is accepted; many are dismissed, to be honest, but it does help to clean up the piece nicely. Grammarly is an AI tool, in case you haven’t realized it.
But does this mean everything I’ve written today is not authentic just because I’ve run it through a grammar-checking tool? Or that I used Claude to generate a 600-word draft, which was only used to ensure that I kept focus on the salient points I wanted to cover and that the structure and flow of the article worked? Claude takes the place of a critic, a writing assistant, a sounding board, and a brainstorming partner—nothing more.
My conclusion is that AI-assisted writing need not impact authenticity. Note the caveat ’need not,’ as it can destroy any semblance of authenticity if misused. Therein lies the problem: How does a reader know one from the other? I guess it comes down to building trust between a writer and their readers. As long as the use of AI is shared with the readers, and they understand and accept it, then the readers can be confident of the work.
This brings us handily to the following discussion point: transparency. But I’m afraid you’ll have to wait until next weekend to discuss that.
Final Thoughts
The main takeaway from this week is that AI can be a marvelous writing tool when used ethically. It doesn't have to diminish the value of written work, which can remain a genuine reflection of your experiences, emotions, and unique worldview.
However, we must remain vigilant. The temptation to rely too heavily on AI-generated content is ever-present, and writers must stay disciplined to preserve the integrity of their work.
Share your thoughts and experiences; I’d feel privileged to hear what you say. Why not reflect on your practices:
How do you currently use AI in your writing process, if at all?
Where do you draw the line between helpful assistance and over-reliance on AI?
What steps do you take to ensure your work remains authentic to your voice?
Next week, I’ll write about transparency and plagiarism in AI-assisted writing, followed the week after by an exploration of GenAI’s broader impacts on the writing industry.
Until then, take care, and have a great week of writing!