NaNoWriMo Sparks Controversy by Refusing to Condemn AI Writing Tools

As fall approaches, aspiring novelists clear their social calendars to dedicate themselves to National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo), the international creative writing event in which participants attempt to write a 50,000-word manuscript during November. It has been running since 1999 and launched as a U.S.-based nonprofit organization in 2005.

As AI, particularly generative AI, has been playing a growing role in many creative pursuits, participants have been calling for clarification on NaNoWriMo’s stance.

On Aug. 31, event organizers posted a blog post stating: “We believe that to categorically condemn AI would be to ignore classist and ableist issues surrounding the use of the technology and that questions around the use of AI tie to questions around privilege.”

They added that “not all brains” have the same abilities and that AI tools can “reduce the financial burden of hiring human writing assistants.”

This statement led to four members of NaNoWriMo’s writers board standing down and one of the event’s sponsors, Ellipsus, withdrawing sponsorship.

NaNoWriMo has since attempted to clarify its stance in an updated blog post, acknowledging the unethical use of AI by "bad actors" but maintaining that a blanket condemnation of AI is inappropriate.

Related:California Issues Generative AI Tool Use Guidelines

The post conceded that: “The fact that AI is a large, complex technology category (which encompasses both non-generative and generative AI, applied in a range of ways to a range of uses) contributes to our belief that AI is simply too big and too varied to categorically support or condemn.”

With AI Tools Comes Great Temptation

Professional writers have since put forward their opinions on the NaNoWriMo controversy.

“The problem with organizations like NaNoWriMo encouraging writers to use AI tools is that it can not only stifle creativity but also encourage digital plagiarism, where the person is no longer writing. The AI bot is doing the writing for them and the human is taking credit for it,” said historical mystery author E.L. Johnson.

Johnson added that generative AI programs like ChatGPT can be of great use to authors by, for example, pointing out plot holes in story outlines, bouncing ideas back and forth and even acting as an editor by suggesting revisions.

“But with the use of AI tools comes great temptation and it’s down to the writer to enforce that restriction on themselves, particularly as literary agencies and publishers stress they do not want AI-written content,” Johnson concluded.

Generative AI vs. AI Writing Tools

Related:Generative AI to Boost Productivity, Skill Creation, Report

Lindsey Chastain, founder and CEO of The Writing Detective argued that there should be a distinction between generative AI and AI writing tools.

“Tools like Grammarly are considered AI and a benefit to writers who may not understand all the nuances of grammar or to those who are writing in a second language,” she said.

“Tools that capture speech and convert to text are also considered AI as are many translation tools, which can be of great assistance to writers while not stepping on the toes of other artists or taking over the uniquely human aspects of writing and creating.”

Chastain said that generative AI can help writers but only as an assistant and not as the creator, for example by creating chapter summaries, finding a perfect word or conducting research.

“The key to using generative AI for creative projects is not to use AI for the creative part of work, but for the mundane tasks that take up a lot of time and effort,” she said.

Testing Writers’ Abilities

Theresa Green, executive director and co-founder at The Writer's Workout agrees with distinguishing between using AI assistance tools and generative AI.

“AI assistance tools provide help with spelling, grammar and speech-to-text, which can help writers create without actively changing their work or stealing other writers’ content to create something the writer didn't write,” she said.

“For example, some people think better out loud; they need to say their thoughts to understand what they're thinking, or they may have a disability that makes typing overly difficult or impossible. Allowing for AI assistance tools like speech-to-text means these writers can still write and create their own works, leading to more diverse views and voices in literature.“In general, a writing competition is there to test a writer’s abilities. If participants are using generative AI, which regurgitates past saved information, to create work, the competition isn't testing the writer's abilities, it's testing the AI.”

Like Taking a Driving Test in a Self-Driving Vehicle

According to Marcia Layton Turner, executive director and founder of the Association of Ghostwriters, the general consensus from professional ghostwriters is that it is “ridiculous” for an organization that seeks to encourage the creation of new written works to allow generative AI.

“Current AI tools effectively regurgitate material they have been fed, rather than creating new ideas, concepts and experiences on the page, allowing NaNoWriMo participants to rely on them strips away any human creativity,” Turner said.

“It would be like allowing drivers to use self-driving vehicles when taking a driving test - there would be little involvement by the human in demonstrating any driving skill. So, one would need to ask if it is actually the human's driving skills being evaluated.”

Turner conceded that using AI tools to improve spelling and grammar is already part of the editing process but the line should be drawn around whether the material is copyrightable.

“Since the U.S. Copyright Office refuses to copyright materials that AI generates, NaNoWriMo should consider taking that position as well,” she said.