NaNoWriMo faces a backlash with its recent statement on the use of AI in writing for this year’s event. The organization faced backlash over its initial neutral stance and comments about classism and ableism, prompting a swift clarification.
ALLi News Editor, Dan Holloway
NaNoWriMo is one of those interesting establishments. In the writing world, opinions are mixed, with some people praising it like a literary second coming and others decrying it as a push toward quantity over quality. In the wider world of people who love books but aren’t as immersed in the debates of writerly forums, there is a sense that NaNoWriMo provides community, motivation, and a kickstart for people’s desire to see their stories come to light.
Every so often, though, through its two and a half decades, NaNo sets off a bigger controversy. And this year, it was a real big one. Ahead of this November’s event, the organizers issued a statement about AI because, well, it’s almost impossible to run a literary event of that size without addressing it.
Two aspects of the statement sparked instant outrage. First was the organizers' neutral stance on how people did their writing. They stated that they would not dictate how participants wrote, including the use of AI.
The second issue was a comment that seemed to take aim at blanket criticism of those who use AI, stating that such criticism was tied to issues of classism and ableism.
About the Outrage
The outrage was widespread and immediate, with writers taking issue both with the promotion of a technology they see as a potential existential threat and the implication that worrying about such a threat makes them classist or ableist.
NaNo was swift to issue a clarification, making a general statement and also changing the wording of the policy. In place of neutrality in relation to AI is a small but significant alteration to “tools that leverage AI.” This change essentially shifts the meaning from “go ahead and ask ChatGPT for 50,000 words” to “we recognize that spelling and grammar checks are helpful.” It captures the distinction between generative AI and other AI-based tools, a distinction recognized in Amazon’s terms and which surveys of writers have shown is recognized by many who write.
NaNo's Response
In place of the statement impugning critics of AI is one pointing out NaNo’s inclusive mission.
The clarifying letter acknowledges the importance of debate about AI and also the right of creators to protect their work.
This has been an incredibly swift-moving story, which is one reason I am covering it at the end rather than the start of the week: to allow the waves to settle. It is indicative of just how much of a touchpaper AI has become in the literary world.
