From the tentative start to the hard-earned finish, writing undoubtedly takes time, which is one of our most precious resources that society tries to organize, optimize and maximize. Combing through convoluted articles for a school research paper or spending agonizing minutes laboring over a singular word choice feels futile when the culminating result still seems imperfect.
Although it is often students echoing this frustration, the idea of wanting to simplify the writing process has made its way to some of the nation’s most prominent journalistic publications, who call upon artificial intelligence for help.
According to The Verge news writer Jess Weatherbed, the New York Times recently approved its staff to use artificial intelligence tools in the newsroom. Permitted purposes include summarizing background information, coding the online website, suggesting revisions and creating select social media content and headlines.
The extent to which the Times will publish AI-generated copy for its articles is not yet clear and is a large part of the question of how much AI should be involved in journalism as a whole. I believe that though some tasks such as basic captions or grammatical errors require less original thought, substantial copy is where the heart of journalistic writing lies, and should thus be left to human editing only.
By making its way from esteemed publications to high school students’ homework assignments, AI has gradually raised the concern of writing’s purpose. Many wonder if it wastes time, and if the act of drafting from pen to paper is futile in the face of a chatbot that can complete the entire process in ten fleeting seconds.
New York Times opinion columnist Frank Bruni experiences this inquiry frequently as a teacher to young students: “‘When I go through students’ papers and flag the misplaced modifiers, note the clichés or explain that a 15-sentence paragraph is less approachable than a five-sentence one, I sometimes ask myself a question that the students who get those papers back from me perhaps ponder as well: Does it really matter?'”
The truth is, it does matter. What ChatGPT’s 10-second process misses is the crux of why writing matters to begin with. The act of grappling with one’s thoughts to bring them to life in a new medium exercises some of the most important human faculties that must remain despite our collective digital revolution. Some of the most thought-provoking works created by humanity include classic novels and historical prose, which before becoming published were born as budding ideas without technological aid. Moving forward, pen and paper must remain a powerful combination, which is a sentiment Bruni continues to echo.
He expresses even the most innovative thoughts must be pinned down and “put…in a long email. Or a medium-length email. Or a memo. Or, hell, a Slack channel.” The importance of self-expression will never waver, whether in a colloquial work email or a heartfelt text to a loved one. Even on the level of a national publication like The New York Times, personal voice often creates more resonance than mechanical, complex language, and that is something only humanity’s written voice can achieve.
