In my AI Pledge, I mention content creators to whom I’ve attributed the notorious moneygrabber label. In the pledge I accept that content creators are welcome to do whatever their desires direct, their skills and budget afford them, and their readers want. And they are welcome to make a “spacebuck” doing it. I give away a lot of stories, but ultimately, I rely on my work as author, writer, editor, and narrator to pay some of my bills.
But there are “villains” out there who are looking for a quick buck with no regard for readers and the art of writing.
Unlike many a tired sci-fi plot, technology isn’t the villain. Humans make better villains in sci-fi and in real life.
What follows is my rant about these villains. Similar to the plots of many a sci-fi story, better technology makes more efficient villains. So, if you don’t appreciate a good rant, skip this article. Thank you for reading and considering the importance of the human author.
MoneyGrabbers as Villains
Although the term “money grab” is overused and often mistakenly attributed, it seems applicable here. As an audiobook narrator for hire, I read many book descriptions and text samples every week. AI assisted fiction is cropping up, but I am amazed at the number of “AI assisted” topical nonfiction books released every day. Some (not all), at least, admit “AI Assisted” on the cover or front matter somewhere—a minor ethic in the unethical business model I describe here. AI designation or not, they are generally in the same quick read format.
These “short topics” or “quick reads” are essentially Wikipedia articles created by AI, given two covers and an “author” name. I compare them to Wikipedia articles in content, but that is unfair. Through community editing, most Wikipedia articles are reasonably well written. They are flagged if they don’t provide primary references. And they are free. (Donations recommended). You shouldn’t rely on Wikipedia for primary research, but it’s a good place to get the scope of a topic and a list of primary sources.
On the contrary, these garbage “books” read like “C” high school term papers and are authoritative about nothing. They have been around forever, but are now easier to produce. Previously, the “editor” had to at least do some work to locate applicable content and obfuscate it, so it wasn’t identified as plagiarism. Now, the AI does the locating, plagiarism, and obfuscating for them. The producers are taking advantage of the intermediate state of technology before “Level 6” (as described in my AI Pledge) is widely available.
If you are producing these books, regardless of quality (because that depends mostly on the AI technology and framing of good questions), you are not an author or publisher or content creator. You are a moneygrabber. And, as described in Level 6, your window of opportunity is closing. You will have to move on to a new scam. Or maybe, decide to do legitimate work.
Why the Angst?
You might understand my frustration, but “Why the angst?” you might ask.
Since these books are directed toward novices on the topic, the reader likely doesn’t know the information is suspect. They don’t have adequate knowledge to be discerning on the topic. An example: I recently looked at a narration audition for a book on choosing a horse and learning to ride. Since this topic is interesting and important to me, I was intrigued. The book was in a series that fit this AI category and was full of horrible “advice” that the unsuspecting reader wouldn’t know they should ignore. Following that advice could be costly and potentially dangerous, and ruin the experience for someone who might otherwise find a new passion.
As affirmation of the “First Laws” section of my AI Pledge and my accusation of the moneygrab approach of these producers, here’s another example. I recently auditioned for a series of books on another interesting and important topic (to me). The publisher offered me the narration for the entire series (11 short books). After reviewing a few of the complete manuscripts, I alerted the publisher to their horrible state. I wouldn’t narrate them unless they were professionally edited.
To the publisher’s credit, they eventually pulled down the series (weeks later and after hurling insults at me, the messenger) and they apparently dropped the “author” from their stable. But they were unwilling to spend any money to improve the series, and the author and the editor credited on the series were unwilling to put in the effort to fix it. (In case you’re wondering, no, I didn’t offer to edit the series and rejected the narration offer, so this isn’t about not getting an editing or narrating gig). I suspect the publisher was caught in the middle of a content creator going for the moneygrab, but they didn’t do their due diligence either. The moneygrab didn’t work, so they abandoned the series. At least they also abandoned the moneygrabber.
My angst is not directed at the AI. Garbage books that appear authoritative on topics that the producer is decidedly unauthoritative are not new and not a problem with AI. AI just makes it easier to produce more of them and package them to look better.