AI Has the Potential to Diminish the Writing Pool

But not for the reason you might think

News about AI and its impact on writing jobs is rampant. Like many writers, I worry about the inevitable loss of work as more people turn to these tools for content creation. But we seem to be overlooking another possibility where this technology is concerned.

How many writers will decide it’s no longer worth the effort to freelance when they must spend extra time and money proving their words are, in fact, theirs?

Google currently does not penalize sites that use AI as long as their content is high-quality. Whether this policy evolves in time is anyone’s guess. But the ripple effect of AI usage extends beyond search engine optimization. Professional writing services must also determine what they deem acceptable from their writing pool.

Unfortunately, new guidelines are being instituted that put the onus on writers to prove their work is original.

What does this mean? Instead of simply submitting your copy, you may now be required to run your work through AI checkers first. Any sections identified as potentially being written by AI would require revision. If you fail to do this step, and the platform’s own AI detection tools flag your work, you could be (1) forced to rewrite the text or (2) use a tool that reverse-engineers your draft document to confirm the writing process.

Think of the added time this costs writers! Time that is not compensated, which means whatever per-hour rate you currently work at will be diminished. Worse, some of these AI detection tools are not free, further eroding your income potential.

For writers who rely on subcontractors as part of their business model, the process just got more difficult.

Also complicating things is the potential for false positives. Normally, I wouldn’t worry about the work I do through professional service platforms. But with horror stories like this one detailed by Linda Caroll, it’s hard not to feel anxious. (Worse, the type of writing many clients want is often crisp and formal… A perfect recipe for AI misinterpretation.)

Whether they realize it or not, platforms and service providers are backing writers into a corner with these AI guidelines. By stating they reserve the right to refuse payment if writers don’t update the text it flags as AI-generated, they aren’t leaving writers much choice. You must either accept the added burden or walk away.

As more clients turn to AI to create their content in-house, it’s understandable why professional writing services feel the need to assert new guidelines. They have to make the distinction between their offerings and those proffered by AI tools if they hope to stay in business.

I don’t envy these decision-makers. But instead of dumping on their writers, maybe they should pay for the tools they’re mandating … Or, better yet, increase the pay per assignment to compensate writers for the time they will inevitably lose proving the validity of their work.

Unfortunately, this recent shift in expectations insinuates the writing pool is guilty until their innocence is proven to the service’s satisfaction. I don’t know about you, but I have no desire to take on more work for the same pay. If I wanted that burden, I would have remained a full-time employee.

The silver lining, of course, is the increased demand for writing that focuses on personal experience. Such opportunities would be a welcome change from the constant push to feed search engine algorithms. And writing from a personal slant would limit the potential for false positives in AI detection… At least for now.