NaNoWriMo is in disarray after organizers defend AI writing tools
NaNoWriMo faces backlash for defending AI writing tools, with critics arguing it undermines creativity. The organization updated its stance, acknowledging concerns about AI's impact and marginalization of disabled writers.
Read original article
The National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo) organization is facing backlash after defending the use of AI writing tools, claiming that opposing such technology is "classist and ableist." In a recent statement, NaNoWriMo emphasized that condemning AI would overlook issues of privilege and accessibility, suggesting that AI can alleviate financial burdens associated with hiring human assistants. While the organization has previously accepted AI-assisted submissions, it acknowledged that this could undermine the challenge's purpose. The response has drawn criticism from writers who argue that generative AI devalues human creativity and artistry. Notably, some disabled writers felt the statement implied they required AI to write effectively. In light of the criticism, NaNoWriMo updated its position to express concern over the potential abuses of AI in the writing industry, clarifying that it does not endorse or condemn AI as a whole. The controversy adds to NaNoWriMo's history of facing scrutiny over transparency and its association with AI tools. The organization has not yet commented further on the situation.
- NaNoWriMo's defense of AI writing tools has sparked significant backlash from the writing community.
- Critics argue that generative AI undermines human creativity and artistry.
- The organization has updated its stance to acknowledge concerns about AI's impact on writing.
- Some disabled writers felt marginalized by NaNoWriMo's comments on AI.
- The controversy highlights ongoing tensions between traditional writing practices and emerging AI technologies.
Related
A new movement of luddites is rising up against AI
An anti-AI movement is rising, echoing the Luddites, as public backlash grows against AI technologies threatening jobs and creativity. Activists seek dialogue and regulation, emphasizing ethical AI integration.
A new movement of luddites is rising up against AI
An anti-AI movement is growing, echoing the Luddites, driven by concerns over employment, creative exploitation, and misuse. Activists seek dialogue and regulation, while public sentiment increasingly opposes unregulated AI development.
Google's Olympics ad went viral for all the wrong reasons
Google's Gemini AI chatbot advertisement during the Olympics faced backlash for suggesting AI can replace human creativity, prompting concerns about its implications in creative fields and diminishing personal expression.
AI stole my job and my work, and the boss didn't know – or care
A freelance writer lost his job to an AI at Cosmos Magazine, which used his work without consent. This incident raises concerns about transparency and the value of human authorship in journalism.
NaNoWriMo says not writing your novel with AI is 'classist and ableist'
NaNoWriMo's partnership with ProWritingAid introduces AI features, prompting backlash for claiming opposition to AI is "classist and ableist," leading to support withdrawal from many writers and questioning the initiative's original spirit.
17 commentsLooks like there was a scandal of some sort last year that led to a community purge of sorts including shuttering their forums. Their FAQ still references this event extensively, withholding any details. [0]
Add the super obvious cooperate sponsorship blog spam [1] (including the apparently removed promotion of their new AI partner [2]), and this looks like a zombie organization that has pivoted to squeezing the remaining value out of their userbase.
[0] https://nanowrimo.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/categories/4403966090...
> National Novel Writing Month, often shortened to NaNoWriMo (/ˌnænoʊˈraɪmoʊ/ NAN-oh-RY-moh),[1] is a U.S.-based nonprofit organization that promotes creative writing around the world. Its flagship program is an annual, international creative writing event in which participants attempt to write a 50,000-word manuscript during the month of November.
It makes absolutely no sense to accept stuff written by an AI
Around 2005 or so, they started pushing the social aspect, with message boards, tracking progress publicly on the web site, and people having "write-ins" where people got together and wrote. They were still each working on their own novel; but, they'd gather to do it. (I think December became the "editing" month, so they could keep going in groups.) Not only was there a certificate; but, also all sorts of "badges."
As it got more popular, people began to look at ways to "cheat." Outlining and writing some words before November. Not writing fiction. Using stuff they'd written before and expanding it.
I've done it (and successfully completed it) a dozen times; but, then I started skipping it. I skipped a couple to 2015, then skipped them until 2020. I was thinking about doing it this year; but, may not.
I've participated a three (or four?) times in the annual NaNoWriMo and completed twice.
When I first participated, I attended a group to help understand how to approach the project. In the group there were several aspiring writers. The group continued after the year's project began and many of the people who most wanted to be writers were already struggling to meet the daily writing quota (so that they'd reach the goal after 30 days).
I think any tools that people use that help them complete NaNoWriMo are fine. People must live with their own decisions and, if the tools write the majority of their submission, that's their decision.
Other people using AI tools doesn't impact my ability to complete the year's NaNoWriMo. It doesn't affect me in any way.
The group leader told us about a tool that she used that would begin erasing characters if she stopped typing for longer than about 5 seconds during her daily write. That's a tool I wouldn't ever use :-)
In the short term, I don't see much alternative but to split each such challenge or prize in two. Which also is not much of a problem.
Many publishers have had to stop accepting submissions because they're being flooded by AI generated content and can't cope.
Nanowrimo is not one of these publishers and has nothing to lose here. It's not classist or abelist to reject a technology that generates a novel for someone who can't be bothered to write one, that floods the market, that stops hard working original authors from having a chance of making it in the already difficult game of getting a book published.
NaNoWriMo is now sponsored by an AI company, and markets AI writing assistance tools, so they published a blog post to defend this apparent contradiction with their primary goal (i.e., humans writing a novel in 1 month from start to finish).
Their nonsensical arguments have resulted in multiple board members leaving, along with blowblack from disabled and poor writers who are insulted that NaNoWriMo justified their marketing of AI tools with the claim that disabled writers and poor need AI to write well.
Like the way you stole Mary Shelley's Frankenstein to construct your analogy here?
Come off it guys... the NaNoWriMo org already said they aren't endorsing the use of AI to write your entire submission for you. They're just saying they aren't going to categorically condemn AI across the board. Seems like a perfectly reasonable position to me. Especially given that pretty much everything - human generated OR AI generated - builds on "that which came before".
The following represents a crude history of human verbal communication. Please complete the series with the next term. Take as much time as you need:
- speech and oration
- written word
- paper
- the printing press
- the word processor
- ?
PSA their argument about ablism is spot on and is obviously so, if your understanding of what "AI" is goes beyond prompting an LLM to "do your work for you."
So many knee-jerk critiques of "AI" are premised and possible on when the critic has little or no understanding of what "AI" is, even today.
Related
A new movement of luddites is rising up against AI
An anti-AI movement is rising, echoing the Luddites, as public backlash grows against AI technologies threatening jobs and creativity. Activists seek dialogue and regulation, emphasizing ethical AI integration.
A new movement of luddites is rising up against AI
An anti-AI movement is growing, echoing the Luddites, driven by concerns over employment, creative exploitation, and misuse. Activists seek dialogue and regulation, while public sentiment increasingly opposes unregulated AI development.
Google's Olympics ad went viral for all the wrong reasons
Google's Gemini AI chatbot advertisement during the Olympics faced backlash for suggesting AI can replace human creativity, prompting concerns about its implications in creative fields and diminishing personal expression.
AI stole my job and my work, and the boss didn't know – or care
A freelance writer lost his job to an AI at Cosmos Magazine, which used his work without consent. This incident raises concerns about transparency and the value of human authorship in journalism.
NaNoWriMo says not writing your novel with AI is 'classist and ableist'
NaNoWriMo's partnership with ProWritingAid introduces AI features, prompting backlash for claiming opposition to AI is "classist and ableist," leading to support withdrawal from many writers and questioning the initiative's original spirit.