In the rap game, if another rapper beats you in a rap battle or punks you in the streets, your reputation takes a hit, and your career might just as well be over. But writing is not rap. AI tools are still not going to write better than talented writers. They can punk okay writers, competent writers but not perfect writers.
There is only so much a machine, software, or technology can do to replace humans.
Ask yourself a few things.
Did robots replace laborers in factories?
Did Grammarly render all editors jobless?
Did dildos and other sex toys make all relationships dead and man-to-woman intimacy irrelevant?
Did the introduction of IT in the workplace make everyone lose their job?
These new technologies were fully embraced and co-existed peacefully with humans but didn’t even put a dent in humans’ role in each field.
ChatGPT might write an article for a blog but cannot answer the comments and address specific questions raised by readers. AI is limited in what it can do because humans still make AI at the end of the day.
There are many customer self-service softwares by companies in the market nowadays. If you have a problem with your service providers, you can quickly solve it on their self-service apps. However, that didn’t make all customer care people lose their jobs. People still call with specific problems that the apps cannot solve.
Did audiobooks and digital libraries kill the libraries, hard copy books, and bookshops?
Bookshops are still fully packed with hardcover books, and people still buy new novels from the shelves to sit down on the bench at the park and have a good reading.
Reading is a culture that is hard to kill, even with the introduction of audiobooks.
Did food delivery apps stop people from cooking? I don’t think so; people still enjoy a cookout in the backyard with friends.
Over the past few weeks, I have read so much more about AI and ChatGPT than I have ever had in my entire life. Even the emails I am receiving from other writers address this concern of AI tools like Jasper and ChatGPT killing the art of writing.
My friend who has used open AI to write an article tells me it can create the human experience, just like an article written by a writer. I am yet to use AI to write anything, but claiming that such apps can create everything and take work from a legitimate creative is absurd.
Can Canva create designs better than a graphic designer? I have worked in an ad firm, and yes, some things can be designed on Canva, but Canva doesn’t understand the brand guidelines of shell or Samsung. If you are creating a flyer for shell, canva might not know how much space the logo should occupy on a brochure.
Grammarly can edit an article but doesn’t know my blog’s brand voice. It cannot capture it well and doesn’t usually consider a written piece’s conversational tone. Every piece of work has nuances, especially if it is creative work. If you were to pass a piece of writing through Grammarly and change everything it suggests, you would end up with an article with very poor readability.
Look at this statement;
Nobody owes you nuthin’
This statement can pass for creative writing. If I were the proofreader in a creative environment (which I was many moons ago), I could give the green light on that statement to hit the billboard or the tv screens. However, Grammarly is not encoded to allow such words to pass. And ChatGPT cannot write that. It is very psychological and nuanced for an AI tool.
The same way Canva cannot tell a company’s brand guidelines is the same way ChatGPT cannot write a statement like “does it matter if your life matters.”
What can I say about AI and creative works? As an information science graduate, it is an integral part of new technology. It is also mental masturbation thinking about how AI will take your writing jobs. There is a higher chance of another better writer taking your job from you than a mere software. If your writing is poor, then AI can do better than you.
What are you writing again? If you make a living writing video sales scripts, AI is the least of your worries. It is not programmed with the formulas and specifics of executing such tasks. It may try, but it can only come up with generic content.
No brand stands out by producing generic content in an era where uniqueness and originality are paramount in content creation. ChatGPT can write jokes; sure, it can, but it will be a bunch of still half-decent jokes. It is an okay technology. It can do a good writing job but is still far from perfect.
I would love to see a YouTube Ad or a TV series script written by ChatGPT that will make me glued to the screen and at the edge of my seat watching.
This article in Guardian calls ChatGPT a fluent bullshitter. I agree with that. It is making content based on what has been made before, which is okay because anything, even new research is drawn on what has been done before so I don’t have a problem with ChatGPT uses other databases to create information.
I watched a video on LinkedIn of a guy who said his friend used ChatGPT to write a couple of cover letters that helped him secure interviews. That is great for me; if you are a great engineer who needs to improve at writing cover letters and is having trouble booking interviews, you can use ChatGPT. If you are a good writer who is awful at editing, feel free to use Grammarly after your writing.
Don’t worry about ChatGPT; they are already scandalous. Time magazine claims they paid Kenyan workers $2 to make ChatGPT less toxic, I wonder how that makes sense. Paying $2 is a very toxic practice in itself. I wonder how such an app can assassinate your writing career if they are paying peanuts.
ChatGPT might be a fluent bullshitter, but bullshitters thrive, especially in environments where competency is lacking, and mediocrity is praised.
Nice week ahead!