How to navigated today’s choppy waters with integrity & transparency
When it comes to artificial intelligence, Americans are of two minds. A Pew Research Center survey released Sept. 17 finds that while many of us appreciate the conveniences AI brings, we’re more likely to view its long-term impact with skepticism — and sometimes deep worry.
The findings have implications for anyone in the creative arts, from authors and publishers to digital artists and entrepreneurs.
Half of U.S. adults (50%) say they are more concerned than excited about the spread of AI in daily life. That’s a notable jump from 2021, when just 37% felt this way. Only 10% now say they’re more excited than concerned. In fact, a clear majority (57%) rate the risks of AI as high, while just 25% say the benefits are high.
Most tellingly for those of us in the creative world: if Americans discovered a painting they liked was created by AI, nearly half would like it less. If they learned that a song they liked was created by AI, 38% say they would like it less, though 58% say it would not change their opinion.
For novelists, publishers, and the broader literary community, this presents both a challenge and an opportunity. How should those of us who live in the world of books interpret these shifting public attitudes toward a technology that’s increasingly making its way into our lives and workspaces?
Creativity as a connective tissue
Perhaps the most sobering finding in Pew’s report is that Americans are broadly pessimistic about AI’s effect on our ability to think creatively. Fifty-three percent believe AI will worsen people’s creative abilities, while just 16% think it will improve them.
I can relate, as an author and reader. When readers pick up a book, they’re not just looking for information or entertainment. They’re seeking a human connection, a unique voice, an authentic perspective shaped by lived experience. Reading a novel is an intimate act, a meeting of minds across time and space. Discovering that “mind” was algorithmic rather than human might feel like a betrayal to many readers.
That’s why I don’t use AI to write my novels, and Pew’s findings hint strongly that many readers share that view. (Related: Back in March I wrote about AI & fiction: Where to draw the lines.)
While I don’t judge authors who do use AI to write their novels, there are two decided downsides to doing so: public dismay and the possible loss of copyright protection. (Do I use AI for research and editing? Absolutely. Readers would — or should — expect authors to take advantage of the same efficiency savings as they enjoy.)
And the more you dig into the data, the more interesting it gets, because the public’s skepticism isn’t uniform. Americans are perfectly happy to use AI for weather forecasting or searching for financial crimes. They draw the line at personal matters — religion, relationships, creative expression. This suggests a nuanced view that authors can work with, not against.
Navigating the trust minefield
Perhaps the most sobering finding for authors considering AI tools is the crisis of confidence around detecting AI-generated content. Three-quarters of Americans say it’s important to know whether content was made by AI or humans, yet 53% doubt their own ability to make that distinction.
This trust deficit creates a minefield for authors. Use AI without disclosure, and you risk a backlash when readers inevitably find out. Overuse it, and you risk losing the authentic voice that readers seek. The answer isn’t to avoid AI entirely — that ship has sailed — but to approach it with transparency and intentionality.
The dangers for the publishing world are apparent. Imagine a marketplace where AI-authored novels flood the shelves of Amazon and other retailers without disclosure. (In many cases, it’s already happening.) Readers might begin to wonder: Can I trust this book? Is the author real?
If that trust erodes, it could damage the fragile ecosystem of independent publishing. Just as food labels reassure us about what we’re consuming, perhaps book publishing will need its own “AI disclosure labels” — a way to signal to readers whether a novel is wholly human-written, AI-assisted, or AI-generated. Already, the Authors Guild offers a “Human Authored” certificate that allows authors to certify their books as having been written by a human rather than generated by AI.
Charting a course of authenticity
So where does this leave writers? The Pew findings suggest a path forward that acknowledges both the utility and limitations of AI in the creative process.
First, consider where AI genuinely adds value without compromising authenticity. Research that once took hours can now happen in seconds — freeing authors to spend more time on the actual craft of writing. AI can help with tedious tasks like formatting citations, checking historical dates, or generating marketing copy. These are the “weather forecasting” equivalents in the writing world — practical applications where readers won’t feel deceived.
But when it comes to the creative heart of your work — the voice, the storytelling, the emotional resonance — that’s where the human touch remains irreplaceable. Americans’ wariness about AI “eroding human abilities and connections” speaks directly to what readers value most in books: the sense that another human being has crafted something meaningful for them to experience.
The risk lens
Among those who rate AI’s risks as high, the most common concern cited in Pew’s survey is that AI will erode human abilities and connections. People worry about laziness, creative atrophy, and a decline in critical thinking
That has clear implications for writers.
Books have always been a bulwark against such erosion. A novel requires patience, reflection, and attention — the very qualities people fear AI will strip away. Perhaps the strongest argument authors can make for human-centered storytelling is that it nourishes precisely the skills society wants to protect.
Other top concerns are equally relevant:
- Misinformation: 18% worry AI will worsen the spread of false information. That’s a real hazard in an era of deepfakes, fabricated sources, and AI-spun “nonfiction.” Readers will demand higher editorial standards and clearer sourcing.
- Control: 17% say society will struggle to regulate AI. The publishing industry may soon face calls for standards around attribution, disclosure, and intellectual property.
- Crime and abuse: 11% cite nefarious uses, such as impersonation or fraud. Already, we’ve seen scams where AI copies authors’ voices or styles to sell counterfeit books.
These risks underscore why readers are right to be cautious — and why the industry must respond with transparency and safeguards.
What authors should do
So, what’s the path forward for writers and publishers in this uneasy environment? A few takeaways:
- Lean into humanity. Make clear what makes your writing human: your voice, your lived experience, your unique imagination. That’s your competitive edge.
- Use AI as a tool, not as a ghostwriter. Readers appear more comfortable with AI as an assistant — helping with research or editing — than as the source of the story itself.
- Be transparent. If you’ve used AI in the creative process, consider disclosing how. Transparency builds trust, while secrecy risks backlash.
- Stay alert to regulation. As skepticism grows, policymakers may step in with rules around AI in publishing. Being proactive can help authors and small presses stay ahead of the curve.
- Preserve the creative ideal. Remember that readers are looking to you not just for stories, but for a human connection. That’s not something AI can replicate.
Conclusion: Use AI strategically
In the end, Pew’s findings tell us that Americans are not not rejecting AI wholesale. Instead, they’re drawing boundaries — welcoming AI in some areas of our lives, but hesitating when it encroaches on the personal, the intimate, the creative.
For authors, that means there’s still room to experiment with these tools, but with care. Readers will accept AI’s use in speeding up research or improving editing and productivity. What they won’t tolerate is being deceived — or having the human heart of literature replaced by an algorithm.
As AI seeps into every corner of our lives, skepticism is not a roadblock but a compass. It points us back to what matters most: stories that reflect our humanity.
