Most people have heard about the famous artificial intelligence application, ChatGPT. You give it writing prompts—"Write me a short story about a girl adopting a dog" or "Create an email to decline a party invitation politely,"—the opportunities are endless. However, there's ongoing chatter, skepticism, and maybe even hostility toward the chatbot.
But why?
I eagerly watched the State Of the Union Address about a month ago. I argue that it is one of the government's most hammed-up public relations (PR) nights. Politicians carefully choose their outfits, thoughtfully react (or don't react) to parts of the speech, bring guests to bolster their political efforts, and are curating the overall messages they hope to convey to their constituents. I digress.
The one thing first-hand listeners (and second-day news consumers) forget is that someone else crafted that speech.
How does this relate to ChatGPT?
Whether we're scared about credibility or plagiarism, I'm here to release a fat secret: you already have been consuming content created by one person and passed off as someone else's work, so why does it matter if a team of technologists take a stab at it?
Vanderbilt University’s Peabody School recently got backlash for releasing a statement generated by ChapGPT in response to a shooting. While this reasonably strikes a nerve with many people, I’ll play devil's advocate and ask, would it bother anyone if the correspondence was sent without the transparency that ChaptGPT curated it? What exactly is the difference between
One person writing an email using ChatGPT, someone else proofreading, adding a signature to an email they didn’t put thought into, and hitting send
Or
One person writing an email, someone else proofreading, adding a signature to an email they didn’t put thought into, and hitting send
They both own levels of disingenuity.
In my experience, plagiarism stopped being a crime after graduation. I’ve handed off (and was compensated for) countless articles and quotes written on behalf of someone other than myself. This is the reality for almost any person who works in the PR and the communications industry at large. There's an endless list of company executives that don’t draft, write, or heavily edit op-eds, blogs, or even commentary coming from their name— sometimes including the ones that are printed in the news (shocker right)!
You might say, "Maya what about the live news interviews I watch on TV?"
It's called a briefing document and someone like myself created strategic bullet points to help the interviewee get to the point, cut out the industry jargon, and keep the public’s interest top of mind. I know this because I've been working in communications in some capacity for about seven years.
You might be feeling a little bamboozled. I can't blame you. I was jaded and a little angry at my own ignorance when I realized that the news was real but partially curated or that the CEO of my favorite brands weren’t actually sending me thank-you emails for being a loyal supporter.
I’m no future-of-work scholar or ethics expert, but I don't believe ChatGPT can replace skilled communications professionals. We will use it as a tool and that’s about it. Good writers will still dedicate endless time to editing and personalizing content to align with editorial style guides, to sound like the person and brand we’re writing for, and make it worth your time to read.
If you’re still feeling some sort of hostility towards ChatGPT for lacking ethics or originality then maybe this means there will be a societal shift and demand for transparency from the leaders and brands we listen to most.
If a person can't write or at least orate thoughts to someone else, do they deserve the exclusive byline? After all, communication professionals are paid to communicate, not to make up content for experts who actually have a Ph.D., tenure in the industry, and lived experiences.
So, what makes us better than ChatGPT right now in terms of ethicality? Not much.
I did not use ChatGPT to develop any part of this article and my opinions do not represent the opinions of any affiliated institutions I have or currently work for.
Comments