Mouloud Benzadi's Blog - Posts Tagged "artificial-intelligence"
The Right of Authors to Use AI: A Proposal for Clear Rules
By Mouloud Benzadi, author, lexicographer and researcher – UK
Artificial intelligence (AI) has certainly revolutionized various sectors of our life. But in literature, it has been met with fear and concern. Works that are the result of years of effort are rejected by publishers and writing competitions if even minimal AI involvement is suspected—often using unreliable detectors and without even the writers’ knowledge. While there have been calls for ethical AI use in editing and proofreading, the guidelines remain vague, and even mentioning it often feels like a taboo. As a writer, lexicographer, and researcher, I felt the need to take the initiative in defending the use of AI in writing, proposing thoughtful ways to approach it, and contributing to clearer definitions of ethical use—along with writers’ rights, obligations, and the question of disclosure.
Use AI for research
As a researcher, I tend to combine Google search engine and AI tools. AI is undoubtedly more effective as it can quickly summarize books, articles, and historical documents in no time, allowing me to gather the information needed without having to read each source in full. AI tools can also assist with fact-checking, verifying dates, locations, names and events to ensure an accurate account. They can also be a novelist’s best friend providing valuable background on historical, cultural, political, or social contexts, helping create authentic scenes especially in historical novels. There is no harm at all in the use of AI as a research tool as it is similar to the use of online search engines, with one major difference—online searches often require checking multiple links and sorting through too much information which are time consuming, while AI provides more specific and targeted responses, saving time and effort.
Use Of AI for Drafting
Authors can also use AI as an assistant in drafting their novels. The use of AI for this purpose is both ethical and beneficial when the author already knows the story, plot, and themes they wish to explore. Rather than replacing the writer, AI serves as a powerful tool to streamline the writing process—helping to organize scenes, generate variations of existing content, maintain narrative consistency, and refine pacing or tone across chapters. It can respond instantly to requests for stylistic adjustments, suggest clearer phrasing, or explore how a scene might unfold differently, all while following the author’s original vision and preserving their ideas and voice. This is not content generation by a machine, but rather content that is produced and guided by the writer, with AI acting as an assistant. Just as authors have long used editors or writing software, there should be no reason they cannot use AI for this purpose. I recently connected with Canadian writer and publisher Shane Joseph and was encouraged to learn that he also uses AI as an assistant—for manuscript evaluation, proofreading, and audiobook narration. However, he draws a firm line between assistance and authorship. In his view, AI should support but never generate content—especially in fiction, where human creativity remains essential. His distinction between ‘AI-assisted’ and ‘AI-generated’ work closely aligns with my own thinking and offers a thoughtful model for how writers and publishers can move forward with integrity.
Ensuring Consistency
AI can be a valuable tool for writers in maintaining consistency. For example, a writer working on a novel might accidentally mix US and UK English, using forms like “color” and “colour,” “toward” and “towards,” or different vocabulary such as “fall” instead of “autumn” or “elevator” instead of “lift.” Compound words might be hyphenated inconsistently, like “well-being” versus “wellbeing.” I can mention my own errors, such as writing “for ever” instead of “forever.” AI can automatically identify and correct these inconsistencies, helping to ensure a uniform style. It can also check formatting, including fonts, spacing, and paragraph layout, so that the document meets professional standards. AI can point out gaps or abrupt transitions in the text too. These are all tasks that a human editor would normally carry out, and AI is simply doing the same. There is no reason why AI should be exempt from performing the work that is expected of a human editor.
AI for Proofreading and Readability
AI can be used ethically to support writers by correcting errors and improving clarity without altering the content or intent. It assists in identifying and fixing common mistakes such as spelling errors—changing “recieve” to “receive”—and grammar issues like “She don’t know” to “She doesn’t know.” It also adjusts punctuation errors, ensures consistent verb tenses and proper syntax, and helps maintain clarity throughout the manuscript. In addition to correcting errors, AI can also help improve clarity and readability. Just as writers rely on editors, they should be allowed to use AI tools to refine their books. If it is acceptable for a person to suggest better word, sentence, or even paragraph choices, then AI should also be allowed to contribute in similar ways. It can rephrase confusing sentences, recommend smoother vocabulary, or break up long passages to make the text easier to follow. For example, it might change “She quickly ran very fast to catch the bus” to “She ran to catch the bus.” The meaning remains the same, but the sentence becomes clearer and stronger.
AI Sharpens Global Voices
Non-native writers like myself who switch to English often struggle with sentence structure, idioms, expressions, or phrases that are not familiar in their first language—challenges that native speakers may not encounter when writing in their own language. These hurdles, however, do not diminish the richness of our lived experiences, ideas, or suggestions, just as the suggestions presented in this article defend the right of authors to use AI as an assistant and help define clear rules for the use of AI in literature. These challenges simply reflect the complexities of mastering a second language. AI can serve as a supportive tool to help bridge this gap, offering amendments that help achieve writing that is well balanced and readable. This enables us to contribute more effectively to global literature and culture, building bridges between us without altering the author’s voice or intent. Since non-native authors already rely on editors to polish their work, ethically employing AI for the same purpose is no different—it is simply a faster, more accessible, and more economical way to achieve a well-structured and engaging manuscript, just as a human editor would.
Freedom to Write with AI
In conclusion, I would like to be among the first voices to call for the freedom to write with AI within clearly defined guidelines. The term “ethical boundaries” is often too vague to offer real guidance, so I would like to recommend a specific rule to replace it: to “give AI the right to perform any task that a human editor normally performs” in the realm of writing. These include drafting, proofreading, rephrasing, suggesting improvements in clarity or tone, identifying inconsistencies, proposing titles, summarizing content, and recommending structural edits. All of these are traditional editorial tasks, and there is no reason AI should be excluded from doing the same. Non-native English speakers have even more justification to use AI tools. Unlike native speakers, we may struggle with inconsistent sentence structures or phrasing that affects clarity and flow. AI can help enhance readability without altering the original ideas or voice of the writer, serving as a practical tool for clearer communication.
Finally, if we apply the rule I am recommending—treating AI as we treat human editors—then writers should not be obliged to disclose the use of AI when it is used in the same way as a human editor. This is not an ethical issue. Writers have relied on human editors for decades without any requirement of disclosure. The same principle should apply here: if AI is used as an editorial assistant, not as a co-author, then no special disclosure should be necessary.
Artificial intelligence (AI) has certainly revolutionized various sectors of our life. But in literature, it has been met with fear and concern. Works that are the result of years of effort are rejected by publishers and writing competitions if even minimal AI involvement is suspected—often using unreliable detectors and without even the writers’ knowledge. While there have been calls for ethical AI use in editing and proofreading, the guidelines remain vague, and even mentioning it often feels like a taboo. As a writer, lexicographer, and researcher, I felt the need to take the initiative in defending the use of AI in writing, proposing thoughtful ways to approach it, and contributing to clearer definitions of ethical use—along with writers’ rights, obligations, and the question of disclosure.
Use AI for research
As a researcher, I tend to combine Google search engine and AI tools. AI is undoubtedly more effective as it can quickly summarize books, articles, and historical documents in no time, allowing me to gather the information needed without having to read each source in full. AI tools can also assist with fact-checking, verifying dates, locations, names and events to ensure an accurate account. They can also be a novelist’s best friend providing valuable background on historical, cultural, political, or social contexts, helping create authentic scenes especially in historical novels. There is no harm at all in the use of AI as a research tool as it is similar to the use of online search engines, with one major difference—online searches often require checking multiple links and sorting through too much information which are time consuming, while AI provides more specific and targeted responses, saving time and effort.
Use Of AI for Drafting
Authors can also use AI as an assistant in drafting their novels. The use of AI for this purpose is both ethical and beneficial when the author already knows the story, plot, and themes they wish to explore. Rather than replacing the writer, AI serves as a powerful tool to streamline the writing process—helping to organize scenes, generate variations of existing content, maintain narrative consistency, and refine pacing or tone across chapters. It can respond instantly to requests for stylistic adjustments, suggest clearer phrasing, or explore how a scene might unfold differently, all while following the author’s original vision and preserving their ideas and voice. This is not content generation by a machine, but rather content that is produced and guided by the writer, with AI acting as an assistant. Just as authors have long used editors or writing software, there should be no reason they cannot use AI for this purpose. I recently connected with Canadian writer and publisher Shane Joseph and was encouraged to learn that he also uses AI as an assistant—for manuscript evaluation, proofreading, and audiobook narration. However, he draws a firm line between assistance and authorship. In his view, AI should support but never generate content—especially in fiction, where human creativity remains essential. His distinction between ‘AI-assisted’ and ‘AI-generated’ work closely aligns with my own thinking and offers a thoughtful model for how writers and publishers can move forward with integrity.
Ensuring Consistency
AI can be a valuable tool for writers in maintaining consistency. For example, a writer working on a novel might accidentally mix US and UK English, using forms like “color” and “colour,” “toward” and “towards,” or different vocabulary such as “fall” instead of “autumn” or “elevator” instead of “lift.” Compound words might be hyphenated inconsistently, like “well-being” versus “wellbeing.” I can mention my own errors, such as writing “for ever” instead of “forever.” AI can automatically identify and correct these inconsistencies, helping to ensure a uniform style. It can also check formatting, including fonts, spacing, and paragraph layout, so that the document meets professional standards. AI can point out gaps or abrupt transitions in the text too. These are all tasks that a human editor would normally carry out, and AI is simply doing the same. There is no reason why AI should be exempt from performing the work that is expected of a human editor.
AI for Proofreading and Readability
AI can be used ethically to support writers by correcting errors and improving clarity without altering the content or intent. It assists in identifying and fixing common mistakes such as spelling errors—changing “recieve” to “receive”—and grammar issues like “She don’t know” to “She doesn’t know.” It also adjusts punctuation errors, ensures consistent verb tenses and proper syntax, and helps maintain clarity throughout the manuscript. In addition to correcting errors, AI can also help improve clarity and readability. Just as writers rely on editors, they should be allowed to use AI tools to refine their books. If it is acceptable for a person to suggest better word, sentence, or even paragraph choices, then AI should also be allowed to contribute in similar ways. It can rephrase confusing sentences, recommend smoother vocabulary, or break up long passages to make the text easier to follow. For example, it might change “She quickly ran very fast to catch the bus” to “She ran to catch the bus.” The meaning remains the same, but the sentence becomes clearer and stronger.
AI Sharpens Global Voices
Non-native writers like myself who switch to English often struggle with sentence structure, idioms, expressions, or phrases that are not familiar in their first language—challenges that native speakers may not encounter when writing in their own language. These hurdles, however, do not diminish the richness of our lived experiences, ideas, or suggestions, just as the suggestions presented in this article defend the right of authors to use AI as an assistant and help define clear rules for the use of AI in literature. These challenges simply reflect the complexities of mastering a second language. AI can serve as a supportive tool to help bridge this gap, offering amendments that help achieve writing that is well balanced and readable. This enables us to contribute more effectively to global literature and culture, building bridges between us without altering the author’s voice or intent. Since non-native authors already rely on editors to polish their work, ethically employing AI for the same purpose is no different—it is simply a faster, more accessible, and more economical way to achieve a well-structured and engaging manuscript, just as a human editor would.
Freedom to Write with AI
In conclusion, I would like to be among the first voices to call for the freedom to write with AI within clearly defined guidelines. The term “ethical boundaries” is often too vague to offer real guidance, so I would like to recommend a specific rule to replace it: to “give AI the right to perform any task that a human editor normally performs” in the realm of writing. These include drafting, proofreading, rephrasing, suggesting improvements in clarity or tone, identifying inconsistencies, proposing titles, summarizing content, and recommending structural edits. All of these are traditional editorial tasks, and there is no reason AI should be excluded from doing the same. Non-native English speakers have even more justification to use AI tools. Unlike native speakers, we may struggle with inconsistent sentence structures or phrasing that affects clarity and flow. AI can help enhance readability without altering the original ideas or voice of the writer, serving as a practical tool for clearer communication.
Finally, if we apply the rule I am recommending—treating AI as we treat human editors—then writers should not be obliged to disclose the use of AI when it is used in the same way as a human editor. This is not an ethical issue. Writers have relied on human editors for decades without any requirement of disclosure. The same principle should apply here: if AI is used as an editorial assistant, not as a co-author, then no special disclosure should be necessary.
