National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo), a nonprofit organization that encourages writers to draft a novel each November, recently caused a stir by announcing its acceptance of artificial intelligence (AI) as a writing tool. The decision, which challenges the opposition to AI as classist and ableist, has sparked mixed reactions from the writing community.
In a statement published on its website, NaNoWriMo clarified that it neither condemns nor exclusively endorses AI. The organization believes that categorically condemning AI overlooks class and ability disparities. NaNoWriMo recognizes that some writers turn to AI for practical reasons, such as financial constraints or cognitive challenges that make traditional writing methods less accessible. The statement emphasizes that not all writers have the financial ability to hire humans for assistance, and using AI is a practical choice for them. It also highlights that underrepresented minorities are less likely to secure traditional publishing deals, and AI tools can provide essential support to help them pursue their writing goals.
However, the endorsement of AI has faced criticism from prominent authors. Daniel José Older, a former member of NaNoWriMo’s Writers Board, resigned in response to the organization’s pro-AI position. Other authors, including Maureen Johnson, also resigned from NaNoWriMo’s Writers’ Board, expressing concerns about how the organization might use writers’ work to train AI systems. Some authors accused NaNoWriMo of promoting meaningless AI-generated content and labeled the organization as anti-art and anti-creativity.
The revelation that NaNoWriMo’s recent sponsors include companies offering AI software and writing tools, such as ProWritingAid, further fueled the backlash. ProWritingAid provides AI-powered tools to enhance writing, including grammar checking, sentence rephrasing, and text generation to overcome writer’s block. This sponsorship raised suspicions that financial incentives influenced NaNoWriMo’s endorsement of AI.
NaNoWriMo collaborates with writing software like Scrivener, which integrates AI tools, and other platforms like Dabble, Storyist, and Ninja Writers, which support the integration of AI services. However, sponsor Freewrite remains focused on distraction-free writing without AI integration.
In response to the criticism, NaNoWriMo acknowledged the unethical practices within the AI space but maintained its desire to support all writers, regardless of their chosen methods. The organization committed to providing resources and information about AI to its community, indicating a strong interest among participants.
NaNoWriMo’s stance on AI could serve as a bellwether for how other organizations and individuals approach the integration of AI in creative fields. For enterprise decision-makers in publishing and creative industries, NaNoWriMo’s position offers valuable insights into the ethical and practical implications of AI.
The broader debate within the writing community revolves around whether AI is merely a tool like a word processor or search engine, directed primarily by humans, or a morally and ethically compromised technology built from copyrighted works without permission. Leading authors currently seem to align with the latter position, equating AI with theft.
As AI evolves and its role in creative processes becomes more prominent, NaNoWriMo’s position will continue to shape discussions around AI’s integration.