National Novel Writing Month defended the use of AI. Now authors are stepping down from its board

Writers are storming off the board of National Novel Writing Month, a popular literary non-profit that challenges writers to pen a novel in 30 days, after it posted a statement supporting the use of some types of artificial intelligence (AI).

The organization, called NaNoWriMo for short, runs the challenge every November, and has grown to about 500,000 annual participants around the world since its inception in 1999.

On Sunday, NaNoWriMo posted a statement on its website that said it does not explicitly condemn or endorse AI, and suggested that opposition to the technology ignores “classist and ableist issues.”

Cass Morris, a fantasy writer and editor who started participating in the program as a junior high student in 2001, said she “immediately” decided to step down from her position as a board member after reading the post, arguing that using AI would discourage creativity and ruin what made the challenge valuable to aspiring writers in the first place. 

“This community has meant a lot to me, and it’s very, very sad that they are lighting themselves on fire,” she said.

Sponsor drops out amid criticism

The post, which was not attributed to a specific member of NaNoWriMo, says that “to categorically condemn AI would be to ignore classist and ableist issues surrounding the use of the technology.”

It went on to say that the “financial ability to engage a human for feedback and review assumes a level of privilege that not all community members possess.” The post also said that “Some brains and ability levels require outside help or accommodations to achieve certain goals.”

Writers have almost universally condemned the statement, and the organization’s recent posts on social media have been overrun by outrage from participants over its stance on AI — especially posts made in the weeks leading up to the controversy that promoted NaNoWriMo’s partnership with Pro Writing Aid, an AI-powered “self-editing” tool.

Ellipsus, a collaborative writing tool, announced Thursday it was stepping down as a NaNoWriMo sponsor “due to their recent actions, stances, and PR regarding generative AI.”

“It seems so absolutely antithetical to what NaNoWriMo, at least originally, was supposed to be, which is a celebration of creativity,” said Morris, the former board member.

“The language in their statement was insulting, frankly. In fact, they are using the language of social justice to justify supporting theft.”

Generative AI uses writing scraped from the internet to train programs that generate or alter text, and often does so without permission from the writers, which is why many consider it theft. Visual artists have similarly condemned AI for using their work without permission. 

NaNoWriMo did not respond to requests for comment.

However, the organization did update its post Monday with a paragraph acknowledging that there are “bad actors in the AI space,” and that “certain situational abuses” of AI clearly conflict with its values.

It also states that AI is “a large umbrella technology” the size and complexity of which “contributes to our belief that it is simply too big to categorically endorse or not endorse.”

NaNoWriMo sold out, says former board member

NaNoWriMo aims to help writers achieve their 50,000-word goal by running a centralized website that tracks word counts and hosts a forum for community discussion and support. It also co-ordinates virtual and in-person events and prizes.

Morris says the program helped writers like herself find their own voices. She suggests that promoting AI as a writing tool removes the opportunity to make mistakes and learn from them, which she says is a critical part of the writing process. 

“It takes away the joy of discovery in writing, of finding within yourself the thing that you most want to say.”

Science fiction and fantasy writer Daniel José Older posted on X Monday that he was also stepping down from the organization’s board, and urged other writers to follow suit.

Author Maureen Johnson, who was involved in the organization for about a decade, posted on X Tuesday that she was stepping down from the board of its Young Writers Program.

“I was really disappointed,” she told CBC News. “You had a good thing. This was a great, free way of people learning to develop writing skills and build community, and you’ve sold it out. And I want nothing to do with it.”

The Young Adult fiction author called the ableism comments “offensive and gross.”

“This is just word soup made by tech bros,” said Johnson, adding she’s now worried the Young Writers Program, which many teachers run for their students to participate in the challenge, is using kids’ submissions to train AI.

Rebecca Thorne, a fantasy novelist who has participated in NaNoWriMo since 2008, called out the organization in a TikTok video that has more than 35,000 likes, accusing the organization of using politically correct language “so that you can’t argue their stance.”

Thorne also alluded to turmoil behind the scenes at the organization, including an alleged exodus of staff members earlier this year, which CBC News has not been able to confirm.

Former executive director Grant Faulkner posted on LinkedIn in March that he was leaving the organization. Using an internet archive search, CBC News found that NaNoWriMo removed the “Staff” section of its website sometime in March, and removed the “Board of Directors” section in April.

The NaNoWriMo website does not currently list any staff or board members.

Novelist worries about normalization of AI writing 

Fantasy and horror novelist Ryan La Sala, who has not participated in NaNoWriMo, says writers could get into trouble relying on AI, as it’s been touted as a “kind of dark magic” that will enable anyone to write whatever they want, when in reality, he says, it churns out low quality writing.

“I think it really endangers writers that, for lack of any other type of discipline or structure, may fall into the trap of taking such a shortcut, and the end result is invariably going to be a pretty bad book,” he said.

While the writers CBC spoke with agree that AI is not currently capable of producing fiction that rivals that of human writers, they worry that profit motives might drive the market toward AI writing in the future, even if it’s of lower quality. 

“So far, the things that I’ve seen produced by AI don’t compare to what I could do on my worst day. So I don’t necessarily feel an existential threat,” La Sala said.

“But I do feel a dread that over time, just because of its availability, audiences are going to settle on just as good, rather than best they can get.”