The Problem with AI
Important change to BBP guidelines
Since Chat GPT 3.5 hit the headlines around a year ago, I have watched the development of AI with interest. Many authors are using AI to generate their artwork, and I have found language models such as GPT 4, Bard and Bing Chat to be very useful for ideation, research, and solving linguistic conundrums.
Until now, I have had no issue with AI-generated artwork or AI-assisted poetry. In fact, I have even published poems that were completely AI-generated, BUT I did this with total transparency, highlighting the fact and using it as a platform for discussion.
My policy on AI has always been that authors should be upfront about it. The ethos of BBP is not to be snobbish or elitist. Yesterday, I published someone’s limerick poetry, and they said they were surprised that I would accept it. Why not? We are all here to express our thoughts, feelings, memories, dreams and reflections (I had to give the nod to Jung there!).
However, after spotting cases where the likelihood of whole stanzas being written by AI was very high (according to the state-of-the-art detection software I use), and no mention of AI was included, I reflected on my stance.
We Deserve to be Credited
Look, if someone wants to reproduce any part of your work, you have a right to be credited, don’t you? Even if you are not fussed, anyone using your work should acknowledge your input. That’s why we have copyright laws to protect your intellectual property.
When AI creates lines of verse or altered images, NO credit is given to the creators of the content it is using. NONE. So, if you are a graphic designer or photographer, and you have put hours of effort into creating something original, an altered form of that work can appear elsewhere, and there’s nothing you can do. No one thanked you. No one credited you. No one paid you.
We are all artists here. Can you see the unfairness of that situation?
Are We Celebrating Human Creativity?
I have consulted with my good friend and co-editor, Jason Provencio, about this because I know he has strong views on the subject. He pointed out, rightly, that we are here to celebrate the work of human beings. What is in your heart? How can you express it with words, pictures, music or other performance art?
This isn’t about being anti-technology like the people who pushed against synthesisers and samplers. I use AI for ideation, research and solving linguistic conundrums, but I don’t use it to create.
With this in mind, I have come to a decision.
No More AI in BBP or BBSS
As you might already know, if you are a contributor to my pubs, I take copyright very seriously and often ask authors to give appropriate credit to creators and hyperlink their captions to the originators. In an ideal world, I would prefer it if everyone stuck to Medium’s built-in Unsplash feature.
In future, these are the images that will be accepted:
- Properly credited and hyperlinked Unsplash images
- Author’s own artwork
- Other people’s artwork that has been altered, PROVIDED you have permission to do that, and appropriate credit is given (with a hyperlink)
AI-generated artwork will NO LONGER BE ACCEPTED
AI-generated poetry (even partly) will NO LONGER BE ACCEPTED
I am sorry if this affects you, and I hope you will continue contributing to BBP and BBSS. In the long term, I believe I am pre-empting changes that we are about to see across the board. Medium has already contacted its members about its AI concerns.
We all need to take a stance on this. You have mine.
Thanks for your understanding.
Martin Morrison, founder and editor of Bouncin’ and Behavin’ Poetry and Bouncin’ and Behavin’ Short Stories
English writer
