Knowing When AI Is Useful—and When It Needs to Stay in Its Lane

 As an author, editor, and book publisher, I get asked about AI a lot—so let me be clear. I am not on board with AI when it comes to creativity. Writing, editing, proofreading, and book illustrations are human work, and I have zero interest in outsourcing that to a machine. Creativity isn’t a shortcut, and it definitely isn’t something that can be scraped from the internet and stitched together.

I’m also not a fan of using AI for factual research. It pulls information from all over the place, and let’s be honest—just because something exists online doesn’t mean it’s accurate. A “fact” can very easily be someone’s opinion wearing a trench coat.

Take the Bible, for example. I’m currently doing a Bible study, and if I were to ask AI to explain Genesis 1, I’d get some blended interpretation pulled from who-knows-where. That doesn’t mean it’s correct—it just means someone, somewhere, had a take and the internet remembered it. When it comes to faith, theology, and truth, that’s not a risk I’m willing to take.

Now, that said, AI does have a place—and that place is harmless fun. Creating a goofy caricature of yourself? That’s entertainment, not publishing fraud. It’s lighthearted, it’s playful, and it’s not replacing anyone’s job. People really need to learn the difference between professional misuse and just having a little fun.

Which brings me to the moment I was recently called out on Facebook for using AI to create a caricature of myself. Yes, really. I calmly explained that it was just that—a caricature. Not a book cover. Not a manuscript. Not my editing work. Anyone who actually knows me as a writer and business owner knows I don’t use AI in my professional process. I take my work—and my clients—far too seriously for that.

And while we’re here, let’s talk about AI “checkers,” because those aren’t exactly the gold standard people think they are. I’ve read countless articles and seen plenty of posts where writers have been accused of using AI when they absolutely did not. You can run entirely human-written work through these so-called detection tools and be told—confidently and incorrectly—that it was written by AI. That alone should tell you how unreliable they are.

As an editor and an avid reader, I can tell the difference. I know when a piece has been written—or even edited—by a human, and I know when it hasn’t. Which is why publicly accusing someone of using AI for their writing is not only inaccurate, but honestly a bit childish. Do people really have nothing better to do with their time? What exactly are you accomplishing by policing someone else’s creativity?

Do I sometimes worry that AI could creep into the industry and affect how many clients I have? Absolutely. That concern is valid. But while AI exists, I’m not going to pretend it can’t be used responsibly—or that everything involving it is the end of creativity as we know it.

Bottom line: AI is good for some things and not for others. In my opinion. But accusing someone of using AI when they actually did the work themselves? That’s nonsense. Let’s focus on real issues—and maybe spend a little less time playing internet detective.