Lately, two things are happening. Decision-makers are buying the hype that AI can replace staff, and there is push-back, especially from creatives, with some people so against AI that they label everything “AI slop”.
Often, it’s easy to spot what has been generated by AI. In the early days, it was the extra fingers on hands and extra toes on feet. Now it’s the standard poster templates. In writing, there is a plethora of tell-tale signs, and they are making life harder for genuine creative writers. A single em dash might set off alarm bells for the anti-AI crusaders.
I’ll admit I’m not fully on board with AI, mainly because I’m still experimenting. So far, though, it has proved an excellent tool. It helps me work more efficiently, so I can take on more jobs and deliver in less time. I think many people would benefit from AI assisting them with a job they already know how to do.
Not a replacement for staff
What AI is not, at least not yet, is a replacement for staff. I’ve seen early adopters fall for the hype, remove vital staff believing AI would do a better job, and then fail publicly. The decision not to hire a graphic artist showed on a local highway billboard, where a hand with six fingers was promoting a candy bar. Then there was the local newspaper that ran a copy-and-paste, AI-generated story complete with the footer, “If you want, I can also make the first two sentences even snappier so it grabs the reader instantly without losing any quotes…” That showed complete reliance on AI, without any effort to review before publishing.
While AI does make life a little easier, we are not at the stage where we can completely trust the output.