Plagiarism: AI-Generated Content vs Ghostwriting Debate

In the evolving landscape of content creation, the use of AI like ChatGPT to generate written work has sparked significant debate. Critics argue that taking credit for AI-generated content is unethical, but is it really? Historically, ghostwriting has been an accepted practice across various fields. This article explores the ethics of AI-generated content versus the traditional and commonly accepted practice of ghostwriting.

Introduction

The advent of AI has brought about transformative changes in many industries, including content creation. However, the ethics of using AI to write content and taking credit for it have become a hot topic. As someone who has published books and ghostwritten for others, I’m flabbergasted by what I see as blind hypocrisy… especially when compared to the long-standing practice of ghostwriting.

To note, this article is not about my personal views on this controversy. The purpose of this article is to add to the debate, give people something to consider.

Ghostwriting: A Historical Perspective

Ghostwriting is not a new phenomenon. For centuries, authors have relied on ghostwriters to help them produce content. Many renowned figures have used ghostwriters to pen their speeches, memoirs, and books. A president addresses the nation… do you think the president wrote that speech, or did they have a speech writer? Yet, the president is cited for the credit of the speech. I mean, do we even teach in school who the speech writer was for the great speeches of history?

This practice has been widely accepted and often celebrated, as it allows busy individuals to share their thoughts and stories without the time-consuming task of writing. Writing well is a specialized skill that most people lack. So, to get their ideas out despite the lack of writing ability, they used Ghostwriters. All without public outcry or ethical dilemmas.

The AI Dilemma

With the rise of AI tools like ChatGPT, a similar process occurs: AI assists in generating content. However, unlike ghostwriting, AI-generated content has faced substantial backlash.

Critics argue that presenting AI-generated content as one’s own work is deceptive. (Wait a minute… isn’t taking credit for ghostwritten work the same level of deception?) Critics contend that AI-Generated content undermines the authenticity and effort traditionally associated with writing.

What’s good for the goose is bad for the CPU apparently.

Comparing Ghostwriting and AI-Generated Content

The core of this debate lies in the perception and acceptance of ghostwriting versus AI-generated content.

One key difference is how the lack of transparency. With ghostwriting, the lack of transparency is encouraged. With AI, the lack of transparency can be seen as dishonest. Ghostwriting involves human creativity and effort, while AI-generated content relies on algorithms and data. This distinction raises questions about the value we place on human labor versus technological assistance.

It reminds me of the show “3rd Rock from the Sun” where Dick was looking at a book of classic paintings and a pornographic magazine, and couldn’t understand why one was deemed art and the other was deemed smut.

Let’s Play Devil’s Advocate

Think about the nature of Ghostwriting for a moment. If a student in school pays someone to do their homework for them, and the teacher finds out, they likely would get detention, and possible suspended from school. Many schools have a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to plagiarism. AI-Generated content is seen as dishonest, taking credit for work you didn’t do. Seem consistent.

But not Ghostwriting. That’s not dishonest, that gets an acceptable pass. Consider how many autobiographies out there were done by Ghostwriters. Probably never thought about it before. I encourage you to go out and look. You might be well amazed.

So, why the Double Standard? If we accept ghostwriting, why is AI-generated content viewed differently? Both involve external assistance in content creation. The main difference lies in our perception of the effort and creativity involved.

It reminds me of a great quote by George Carlin,

“Why should prostitution be illegal. Selling is legal. F|_|(|<ing is legal. Why isn’t selling f|_|(|<ing legal? You know, why should it be illegal to sell something that’s perfectly legal to give away.” -George Carlin

I said it reminds me, not that it’s a perfect analogy. Just trying to keep this lively. As we have adapted to other technological advancements in the past, it may be time to reconsider our stance on AI in content creation.

• Could AI be seen as just another tool, similar to a ghostwriter, that aids in producing high-quality work?
• Should AI be credited as a co-author or simply as a tool used by the human creator?
• How can we ensure transparency and ethical use of AI in content creation?
• Should we hold Ghostwriting under the same scrutiny as AI-Generated content?
• What standards should we apply to AI-generated content to maintain quality and authenticity?

Ghostwriting Controversies???

That’s not to say that there hasn’t been controversy surrounding Ghostwriting. There are many debates that Shakespeare didn’t write his plays. Yet it is still taught in school.

Now many of the controversies with Ghostwriting has to deal with the music industry. So far, AI-Generated Content has not entered into the realm of the mainstream music industry (not yet at least), which is where many concerns of ghostwriting is today. It’s one thing to do a cover of another artist, even if it is not expressed that it is a cover (one can easily find out).

And it’s not unheard of of other artists writing for other artists. Lionel Richie wrote the song “Lady” for Kenny Rodgers. This is an example of ghostwriting, which is not a controversy for anyone. Not saying it should be, but imagine if an artist got ChatGPT to write a song for them and it became a #1 hit. You might argue that when the song was release, Lionel Richie’s name was listed for the song as who wrote it… but how many people really looked at that, and instead believed, it was Kenny Rodgers who wrote it?

From Wikipedia on Ghostwriter:
‘In hip hop music, the increasing use of ghostwriters by high-profile hip hop stars has led to controversy. Critics view the increasing use of hip hop ghostwriters as the “perversion of hip-hop by commerce.” This is because of the limiting definition of “rapping” as “expressing yourself through your own words, not someone else’s.”[45] Chuck D of Public Enemy thinks this point of view is mistaken because “not everyone is equipped to be a lyricist and not everyone is equipped to be a vocalist.”[46] He points out that creating a rap song may require multiple talents. Frank Ocean started his career as a ghostwriter for artists such as Justin Bieber, John Legend and Brandy.’

Some of us have the talent to deliver ideas and some of us have the talent to create ideas. Few of us have both.

The Human Factor

What’s this really comes down to is what section title says… The Human Factor. The reasons why Ghostwriting has never really come under scrutiny is really, we just don’t care. Not one bit. So why do we care that the AI can generate content? Because it’s not human.

With Ghostwriting, a human is still writing it, and so long as that is the case, it’s acceptable. AI is not human, so thus, it’s unacceptable. And that is why so many jump on this controversy. I mean, if these people are really so concerned about people taking credit for work that is not their own… then where have they been for anyone else doing it?

Accessibility and Cost

Another element to consider about why Ghostwriting is acceptable and AI-Generated content is not, is cost. Historically, ghostwriting was accessible primarily to those who could afford to pay for the service. High-profile individuals and wealthy clients could hire ghostwriters to produce high-quality content on their behalf. This exclusivity limited the use of ghostwriters to a relatively small group of people.

In contrast, AI tools like ChatGPT are inexpensive or even free, making them accessible to a much broader audience. This democratization of content creation means that more people can have “ghostwritten” work, blurring the lines between traditional ghostwriting and AI-generated content. The widespread availability of AI tools levels the playing field, allowing anyone with access to technology to produce professional-quality content.

Conclusion

As I mentioned, this isn’t about my personal views. I can assure you my personal views on this is highly complex. This is not whether or not I support it, this is about poking holes into the argument against the use of AI-Generated content.

The essence of what AI grants people is not a new concept. Since the written word was invented, someone paid someone else to do the writing for them to claim as their own. And if you’re going to take the stance this is wrong, then you need to address the larger issue of ghostwriting as a whole. Why has Ghostwriting always been acceptable, but now it’s not? Is it because it is a non-human doing it? Is it availability? Cost? Or just a controversy to jump on?

Yes, I’ve done Ghostwriting for others, so they could take credit for my words. I needed the money. I also believed in what they were doing. I wish I could tell you which books are mine, but that’s now what I agreed to. Some people out there have amazing ideas, but don’t know how to put their ideas down on paper in an engaging way. Should they then be forbidden from putting their ideas out there? I leave that question open to everyone.