This source is from a man who has used Ai to completely write mini books for him. He generates the writing, the images, and then publishes all within a few hours. His main point in his article is that he is saving time. To critics, he points out that his method has value because of the money he has been able to generate in such a short time. Time and money are his measures of value, not quality or artistry. This raises questions about whether or not this view will become more prevalent in the writing and publishing industry as a whole.

  • Kapoor, Sasha. Narayana, Arvind. “AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can’t, and How to Tell the Difference,” September 12, 2024, https://pdf.ac/GUYiV 

This source is one that is used in the central framing of the paper. Kapoor provides clear descriptions of what different types of Ai do, as well as how they are different from each other. Kapoor also creates a metaphor for our modern relationship with Ai dialogue, coverage, and usage, as well as provides a subtle list of things to keep in mind while engaging with AI, namely how they work, what they’re used for, who they’re used by, and how they fail. All of this sets a baseline of knowledge for the reader to understand what is being talked about and, hopefully, give them enough background to read with their own critical lens and come to their own conclusions about Ai’s role and place and the creative industries.

This source argues for a pro-AI in creative industries stance. Rote provides advice for how authors should be using AI, and a little bit of how they shouldn’t be. This source argues for using AI to help write books, specifically to help with generating ideas, structuring, doing research, enhancing grammar, and developing characters and plot. In the paper, I argue that regardless of whether or not you think that what Rote is suggesting is a good idea, the information on how to use Ai in creative production is out there for anyone to find and use. Rote’s article speaks with authority that using Ai in this way is helpful and morally sound, while ignoring the reality that people are already using Ai to completely write for them. As an advice piece, his article can be taken lightly, however, as a recommendation piece, Rote’s view seems to enable via readers Ai’s encroachment into the writing and publishing industry and the potential diminishing value placed on –and willingness of the author to– engage with the creation process through hard work and progress.

This source is another framework source that I used to help develop both my own understanding of creativity/creative products and my thoughts on AI’s place in the creative process. I specifically pull from Subramanian’s paraphrasing of Naomi Baron’s book Who Wrote This, where Baron talks about the Cs (levels of creativity and professionalism) of writing specifically. There are four levels of Cs, all describing different levels of creativity required in the process, and I believe that this C tier can be applied to more than just writing and is a helpful tool for determining where Ai should and should not be used. In the paper, I propose that the bigger the C, the less Ai should be involved. This source, through the Cs, also allows me to deepen the reader’s thinking about Ai and creativity by engaging with an idea that has clear rules that the viewer can decide if they agree or disagree with.