Adrie van der LuijtA few days ago, I inadvertently became the target of a significant backlash on Bluesky from individuals who reject all AI as intrinsically unethical and an environmental threat. 🧵
#AI #ethics #copywriting #ux #digitalinclusion #AIDebate #realism #contentdesign
Professionally, I wouldn't have had the career I've had if I could not see all sides in a debate and really try to put myself in other people's shoes. I really can. I have evidence from victim support organisations and others to prove it.
I’ve read threads like this one many times now: passionate, articulate, and full of pain: "Developing the work is the work. You can’t train a thing to do what I do by chewing up my words and vomiting them back up again."
That line stays with me. And it’s why I don’t believe generative AI can ever replace expert practitioners. But I also don’t believe that disengaging from AI entirely will save our professions.
I am currently working with ProCopywriters to develop a copywriter code. Many members would like it to include an absolute ban on using AI tools. That is unrealistic and not pragmatic. It also overlooks that AI is increasingly integrated into the tools we use, from Microsoft Word to LinkedIn.
Just as with a cookie policy, we can be transparent about where we use AI, while also focusing on the quality of the end result. We can acknowledge the deep harm caused by exploitative training practices and advocate for transparent, ethical, human-led use.
We can protect our craft not by shutting the gates, but by shaping the guardrails. I’m not naïve about what’s at stake. But shouting “all AI is theft” while ignoring its widespread, real-world use won’t preserve the professions we love. It will just ensure others decide their future for us.
The AI ethics debate: Confront...
The AI ethics debate: Confront...
