Don’t Screw Up This Platform, Please
The problem with using artificial intelligence to write your blogs
Man Versus Machine
In this picture, a man is playing a machine at chess.
It is the man’s turn. He is thinking, assessing, cogitating, puzzling, imagining, evaluating, deliberating, pondering — then finally deciding.
He makes his move.
His fingers release his knight to rest on a square as the mechanical arm of the machine swings into action. Its articulated fingers grab its queen and move it three squares to the left.
Checkmate.
The soft tissues of the man’s brain and all those billions of synapses firing in all directions are no match for the processor speed of electronic components and integrated circuits of a chipset.
It has already calculated, with unerring accuracy, all the moves the unworthy piece of flesh and blood could think up.
Yes, this chess computer is powerful. It can complete 92,000 instructions per second. It can process the information without having to assess, cogitate, puzzle, image, evaluate, deliberate, or ponder.
So why not use all that computing power to write for us?
The real problem
ChatGPT (and the like) has given us the ability to create entire blogs or even books, in seconds. I asked ChatGPT to write an intro for this piece —
“In the ever-evolving landscape of content creation, the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) has sparked a fascinating conversation about the intersection of technology and human creativity.”
Do you recognise it?
I did.
I’ve read it in dozens of articles here on Medium. You just need to insert your topic into the template.
“In the ever-evolving landscape of (………..), the emergence of (…… ……) has sparked a fascinating conversation about the intersection of (……….) and (……….).”
The problem with using artificial intelligence to write your blogs is it regurgitates the same hackneyed sentences, over and over. And the more people use it, the more overused phrases it will vomit up.
As an editor and avid reader on Medium, I come across these telltale signs all too frequently. I refuse to read any further. I might put the text through an AI detector to confirm my suspicions — and it always does.
The people blatantly using AI are often ghost followers
I find it interesting to look at the profile of writers using AI. I consistently find they follow tons of people. And I mean gazillions.
I’ve had over 300 new followers his month. The majority of them have shown no engagement by clapping or commenting on my articles. A case in point — one of them has been on Medium for less than a year and follows over 40,000 people.
To put that into perspective, if she had read only one article from each of the people she follows, she would have spent over 12 hours a day, 7 days per week reading on Medium.
If you read the AI-generated offerings they post, half the time they make little sense. It’s all, “In the world of… this,” and “the tapestry of… that.” My gut gurgles and groans. My brain freezes like I just ate too much cold ice cream too quickly. It’s much more than being bored.
When I read AI-produced content, my eyes glaze over, my head drops into my hand and I grieve like my grandad just passed away.
“You can fool some of the people…”
Yes, some people are responding to these AI posts. Giving the cut and pasters (I refuse to call them writers) credit for… well, cutting and pasting.
Ironically, some people are using AI to summarise articles and post comments. Why not remove humans from the process altogether? Let the algorithms clap and comment on each other and we can go back to swinging in the trees.
Does that mean we shouldn’t use artificial intelligence for any part of our writing?
Artificial intelligence can be useful for writers
The man playing the machine at chess will learn. He will learn faster than he would if he were playing a match with a human opponent who takes minutes to play his imperfect move.
Artificial intelligence can be a useful tool. I use an analyser to test my headlines and subtitles. It’s there to help me come up with the right combination of words to attract readers to my articles.
I never use AI-generated headlines, they disappoint. There’s always the formulaic colon. “The Dark Side of AI: Navigating the Hazards in Blog Writing.” There’s no appeal to human emotion.
Yes, use AI to help you choose a title, but always use your gut instinct. This will become clearer later.
AI-generated images
I use Unsplash. Medium makes it easy. I type in the subject, get a set of photographs, and choose the one I think is most appropriate. Note that I choose it, not the algorithm.
The speed and efficiency of adding an image using Unsplash is wonderful. The problem is we can end up using the same tired old images over and over — but that is better than the alternative.
Many writers are using computer-generated images. Each one is an original — and they can be fascinating, but they are rarely memorable. In time, we might put photographers out of business. People who have spent years honing their craft and rely on the additional income the sale of their images provides.
Using AI-generated images won’t stop me from reading an article, it’s the writing that is important. I can appreciate both and I absolutely appreciate the talent that goes into self-produced artwork, comic strips, etc — you know the things I can’t do.
Grammar checkers
When I’m finished writing my article, I put my work through a grammar checker. Like the chess computer, it has rules to follow, and it identifies spelling mistakes, misplaced punctuation and dangling modifiers (whatever they are).
Grammar checkers are the best. They avoid us getting a slap on the wrist from an editor. They help polish your work and make it more professional. Doesn’t matter how good we are, we all make mistakes. Grammar checkers help us avoid stupid errors, especially useful if you suffer from dsylexia, like me.
There is an even greater benefit. The more I use a grammar checker, the more I learn. The more I learn, the less likely I am to need it.
Engaging writing
I have never followed a writer on Medium without first having read their work. And only then if they engage me with their content. I enjoy being entertained, enlightened and empowered. I can’t possibly read everything everyone writes (unless you post it to E³).
There are a dozen writers I follow who I read absolutely everything they write. The common denominator between them is they are different, unique, inimitable. They have a style all of their own. Their writing isn’t an amalgamation of millions of other writers.
And they have something to say. They tell an engaging story with a point. It might be to make me laugh or cry, learn something new about the world or myself, or simply to understand their point of view — whether I agree with it or not.
AI-generated writing doesn’t do that. Not yet. I imagine it might improve to the stage where it can also fool some of the people some of the time.
Sadly. I get why people use it. Their circumstances might mean they need the money and they are only doing what they can to survive. Unfortunately, the more people use it, the more likely they will screw up this platform.
The final say
The chess computer doesn’t decide where to move its queen. It only follows the orders we have programmed it to follow, and it obediently moves its queen three squares to the left.
It doesn’t know it has won.
It is just a series of switches, on or off, off or on. There’s no sense of achievement, no gloating, no pride in a job well done. It beats the man, but it beats no drum.
Without the electrons we send surging through its system, it is as useful as a paperweight.
We designed that computer.
Without us, it would not exist.
Writers, I urge you all to beat your own drum.
