Introdcution
Artificial intelligence (AI) can help with writing code, writing emails, writing questions, answers, even writing entire essays.
We have seen it pass English tests, correct spelling and grammar errors, as well as worry many writing professionals, including copy writers.
The uses for writing seem limitless.
But, some say the text is too shallow. It is only good for general advice. It isn’t even ‘real’ writing. With the biggest critiques focused on ‘silly’ mistakes and lack of sources.
Well, Bing AI now has sources, which will undoubtable be replicated. Prompt engineering is leading to deeper responses, with more sophisticated jargon. So does this mean a writing revolution, is actually upon us?
Writing
Before we can answer that question we first need to grasp what writing is. Is it putting words next to one another? Creating rule governed sentences? Communicating what you know through a paragraph? or sharing a summary for a reader?
Teachers may argue it helps with assessment of understanding. Readers of the newspaper are looking for information, while readers of a blog are looking for entertainment. Some writing is too complex and hard to read, some writing too simple and boring to read.
The purpose of readers, changes.
Teachers may look for one thing, but students look for another. Thinkers may argue writing helps you formalize your ideas. While writers may argue it is exposing gaps in your knowledge and logic.
The purpose of writers, changes.
Arguments can be made for the purpose of writers and readers, but everyone responds differently.
What matters is the difference between good, and bad writing.
Rules
We could argue bad writing is subjective, but there are common elements. Unclear text, poor structure, and grammatical or punctuational errors make it hard to read. Elements teachers often address.
You are told to follow a structure, define, explain, develop, evidence, and summarize your ideas, with variations on breadth and depth. Often told to follow rules and guidelines about punctuation, verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Most of which you will probably forget.
Teachers are paid to read your work, in the real world if the readers don’t care, the writing is ‘bad’.
Writing is only good if it is read.
Bad writing will cause a reader to slow down, potentially misunderstand, get aggravated and eventually stop reading. Would you read something that isn’t important? Would you read something that is hard to read? Would you read something that you already know?
Probably not.
Using ‘wow words’, good punctuation, and lots of adjectives, with a clear description of knowledge, is what the rules lead you to do. Genuine content, meaningful ideas, and a strong sense of the reader with imagination and fluency gets left behind.
Moving up the educational ladder you could be told, ‘find a gap in knowledge’ as filling a gap is valuable.
Valuable to who?
Knowledge isn’t bounded by limits. Knowledge isn’t confined to boxes. Knowledge isn’t a puzzle to complete.
Words like original, unique, and creative are often used to describe ‘good’ writing. But if I tell you what is on my desk while I type this, is that ‘good’ writing? It is original, no one else knows it. It is unique, it hasn’t been seen before. It is creative, I am connecting ideas together. But it isn’t valuable.
A reader has a role, a perspective, and a view of the world. Bad writing is writing that doesn’t add value to the reader. It doesn’t challenge their role. It doesn’t challenge their perspective. It doesn’t challenge their worldview.
Does that mean value comes from telling the reader what you think?
Quite the opposite. Value comes from asking the reader what they think.
Process
Asking the reader endless questions is not ‘good’ writing. Why? Because people will stop reading.
Direct questions don’t set a context. They don’t have a story for a reader to follow. There isn’t an argument or side being shared.
‘Good’ writing is related to verbal skill, domain knowledge, and every part of the process. It is a distillation of highlights, separated from the mundane.
Having an idea is easy. Organizing the text can be rule-governed. Word choice can be simple. But sharing a voice. Writing with fluency from experience, and presenting a perspective, requires meaning, understanding, and expertise. That is part of the process.
Laying out an argument for both sides shows an understanding of different perspectives. Sourcing ‘good’ writing creates persuasive evidence for each argument. Isolating a problem, contradiction, or something overlooked, brings intrigue.
This evidence is great and covers all these points, but…
But what about this?
But have you considered that?
But this evidence suggests something else.
The importance to the reader then becomes evident, not from you asking them questions, but from your process of creating doubt with your writing.
Few people are told why they should write. But they are told how to write. Research, write your first draft, then revise and edit before publication.
Why research? Why write multiple drafts? Why edit at all? Especially now, if AI can do it for us.
Because having a story, a voice, a perspective requires your own understanding. Writing is a mess. From steps 1 to 2 back to 1.3 to 4. The process of writing doesn’t follow rules, it follows your thinking.
Without ‘bad’ writing, we wouldn’t know what ‘good’ writing looks like. Most writing starts out jumbled, wordy, and hard to read. Not because you don’t know the rules. Because you’re still working through your process to tell the story.
Write with low stakes. Write with freedom. Write with imperfection.
The spread of every story starts with writing. On a phone, computer, notepad, napkin, or cave wall.
But the process takes time, to develop a valuable story worth telling.
Story
All stories, be it long or short, funny or serious, simple or complex, change as they are written. Many finding the subject, emerge through the writing process.
That process could be detailed with plots, characters, and intricate connections. Or as simple as a bulleted outline, giving freedom for ‘word smithing’ a story.
Each story with a why. A problem to solve. A perspective to express. An experience to share.
Setup -> Conflict -> Solution
Styles may change. The structure may change. The medium may change. But the story stays the same.
A story’s value to a reader may not be obvious. It is rare for fantasy stories, abstract stories, and personalized stories to directly translate to real-world problems. The ideas don’t hold up in practice. But the reader’s interpretation brings the value into practice.
Readers love to hear about bad things, conflict, disasters, controversy as well as sensationalized events. Great for entertainment, but what are the takeaway messages?
YouTube researchers online, so do you share stories that sell?
Repeating what has been said, in your own way, ticks all the boxes. Solving a problem, check. Unique voice and perspective, check. Structured response, check. Sharing how you came to your conclusion, with plain explanations, and removing redundant information, gives you a story. But a story is never finished.
You need to do the reading. Not for the number of references, but because knowing what to write, takes longer than writing itself. A story goes beyond the words you write.
A story is a continuous, connected, conversation.
Packaging
Putting things together is easy. Putting things together for others is challenging. Putting things together for others to gain value from, is harder. But putting things together for others, to gain value from, that they will enjoy, is very difficult.
Depending on the type of value, it can seem unachievable.
As much as some don’t like to admit it, the way it looks matters.Post-production matters. Editing for the audience, matters.
In some cases, editing for the content algorithm.
Adjusting contrast, speed, tempo, angles, and perspective sound like video editing terms. That’s because they are. Yet they all apply to write.
Vloggers use narration over B-roll for detail. Motion graphics for emphasis, or a different way to tell a story.
Each decision is made for the intended audience, to take them on a journey.
Sound is used to create a feeling. Altering pitch, tone, volume, and speed to create an immersive environment.
Writers do the same with word choice. The length of sentences, paragraphs, and chapters. All to build an immersive, emotional, environment. Created in an organized mess. Going beyond show and tell, and into the minds of the readers.
Packaging changes the story.
Audience
You don’t care about me. I don’t care about you. But we all care about ourselves.
The internet is not lacking voices. It isn’t lacking ideas. It isn’t lacking writing. So what do you have to say that an audience wants to read?
Promote an idea. Use a proven format. Tell emotional stories. Select a niche that suits you as a writer.
Advice is repeated all over the internet. But how do you stick out to your target audience?
Readers want more than an idea. They want to know how it helps them.
If the intention isn’t to contribute to a conversation, the contribution is often unwanted, and not needed. Respect reader’s intelligence.
Individualised medicine, is better than generalised advice.
Value
Higher quality doesn’t always mean higher value. Popular books have mistakes. World-leading thinkers and authors can be wrong. Compelling arguments can be baseless. But the stories share an interesting point of view.
Link claims and reasons together. Gain clarity in your position. Express your voice, balanced between sources. Share your argument with related evidence. Now you have an interesting point of view.
But we have learned to ignore things online. The meaningless quotes. The promotional propaganda. The background noise of shared content. We share the excitement over the useful because it spreads.
Value is hard to measure. Metrics matter. Likes, shares, followers, or subscribers. Money is another big motivator. But the audience matters more than metrics.
Easy for some to say.
But the audience, values, help.
Offering advice is not giving the right answer, but helping people ask the right questions.
We add value by using our time to do something new or create a better path forward.
If the audience doesn’t see a problem, they won’t value the advice.
Is the interesting point of view helping, or harming?
A wildfire topic, idea, or event that is trending out of control, may lead to incredible metrics. But could leave nothing but destruction in its wake. Yes, it has added value, but of what kind?
Leaving out the context can do more harm than good.
Value is judged by the consumer, not the creator. So check the context.
Creativity
A Creator’s life is complicated. Please the content algorithm. Be a consistent work horse. Yet find a healthy life balance. Most jobs are the same.
But most jobs don’t rely on creativity.
A writer’s entry barrier is low. A Pen and paper get you going. A videographer’s entry barrier is low. A Phone is all you need. But a creator’s entry barrier. Is that low?
If creation is making something then yes, the barrier is low.
If creation is putting things together, then no, the barrier is a little higher.
If creation is combining things together to create ‘new’ value, then definitely not, the entry barrier must high.
Of course, we will all differ in our answers. Some arguing videographer and writer entry levels should be higher. But without consensus on standards, the answers are individualized.
What seems to be agreed, is that prior knowledge is needed. From reading, researching, or experience. But just enough to get you thinking.
There is an argument for writer’s block and an argument against it. You can always write, it is the quality that changes.
So you can always create, it is the quality that changes.
AI writing
At its core, AI writing is glorified autocompletion. But there is the wave of intelligence that comes with it.
AI may not have meaning or understanding of the words, but that is added by the reader’s interpretation.
AI is fast. AI is easy. AI does what it is told.
You can ask for different outputs, like a table, a list, or a mind map. It helps with code, music, and language learning. But there are mistakes, errors, and factual inaccuracies which require human intervention.
Convenience often comes with consequences. This could be the ‘blurry’ nature of AI outputs. Or the lingering question of accuracy.
If AI is to revolutionize writing, to me the question is not about when, how, or why, but what?
What can AI do to help the writing process?
Revolution
The introduction of search, revolutionized a part of writing. It altered how we read. How we browse sources. What we think about looking for. So much so, it deserved its own part in the writing process.
We don’t just read from a library anymore. We search. Narrow the search. Look at related search results. Maybe without even moving from our bedrooms.
A similar revolution happened with calculators, spell checkers, and various technical developments.
So what makes AI text generation a revolution? Is it anything more than a next-gen search engine?
Much like search, if you put garbage in you get garbage out. You ask vague questions, you get broad responses. If it isn’t popular on the internet, you will have to go deeper.
Thus, learning prompt engineering is becoming a new skill.
Setting the context. Specifying the responses. Creating a conversational practice environment. All to make search more friendly.
You get a quicker, more endless, and more relaxed mentoring experience compared to traditional search results. But still restricted by the quality of sources, with additional issues.
If a revolution is “a dramatic and wide-reaching change in conditions, attitudes, or operation” then AI doesn’t hit the mark, yet, in many areas of writing.
Writing is far too complex for AI to revolutionize, but it can certainly revolutionize parts of the process.
Ethics
AI uses other people’s work to give an answer. Plagiarism, copyright, intellectual property, and other related ethical issues, then need to be addressed.
What does AI copyright look like?
What classifies AI plagiarism?
Can AI have a claim for intellectual property?
Turnitin, the University standard tool for checking plagiarism, is working on it. and other AI detection tools are being created. But are always one step behind.
Some predicted sources in 2024. But we have them in February 2023.
Many academics argue for restrictions on AI use. AI use being academically dishonest. Urging for policy protection to aid academic integrity. Believing AI can be disruptive in the classrooms.
However, I would question the reason for the worry.
If the writing is accurate, sourced, and passes the grading criteria, what is the issue?
Who loses out with AI-generated writing?
Information is already shared online without sources.
Information is already shared online that is full of misinformation.
Information is already shared online to help people do things quicker, easier, and without learning.
AI text generation isn’t creating problems, it is emphasizing existing problems.
Professions
The writing jobs that AI is threatening to take, are likely jobs requiring limited expertise.
Those with rule-governed tasks. Those with repetitive tasks. Those with shallow overviews. But, the output would still need to be checked.
New jobs will emerge such as selling prompts, creating prompt-related courses, and prompt engineering positions. Valuable jobs require expertise.
‘Bad’ writing is harder to mark. Arguing is harder than explaining. Including multiple perspectives is harder than discussing a single view. ‘Good’ writing requires expertise.
We want to move away from bad writing but don’t teach how. We worry about the illusion of explanatory depth but don’t test it. We are looking for a change in direction, but fighting against it. Effective learning requires expertise.
Humans have the expertise, AI has pattern recognition.
Closing thoughts
AI follows the rules. AI recreates past work. But AI can’t add, to what has been said. Humans can go further.
AI can create sentences. AI can form paragraphs. But AI can’t create a story without the appropriate prompt. Human knowledge limits AI.
AI adds convenience. AI adds ease. But AI adds mistakes. The more you want to be sure, the less you want AI.
AI can write a story. AI can tell a story. But AI can’t yet connect a story. Bringing ideas together still requires a human.
AI does as it’s told. AI follows ‘best practices’. But AI can’t be nuanced. Only humans have the expertise to break the rules.
AI can share the obvious. AI can share the popular. But AI can’t be individualized yet. Humans understand the context.
AI doesn’t have meaning. AI doesn’t have emotions. But AI can sound confident. Humans need to check the work.
AI didn’t create plagiarism. AI didn’t create a search. But AI is supposedly the problem. Humans created the problems, AI is just emphasizing them.
So is a writing revolution upon us?
AI can put words next to one another. AI can use rules to create a sentence. AI can communicate the past through paragraphs. AI can create summaries for a reader. But AI can’t think. And thinking is part of writing.
AI can revolutionize elements of search. Brainstorming questions. Exploring research ideas. Collecting popular knowledge. But AI can’t revolutionize writing.
Writing as a whole is too complex to be revolutionized.
Writers are not going anywhere. But they do have another tool at their disposal.
