AI: Collaborator, Competitor or Cannibal?

This article by Anna Ganley, CEO of the Society of Authors, is one of a series commissioned as part of MyWorld, a UKRI-funded project that explores the future of creative technology innovation by pioneering new ideas, products and processes in the West of England. We have commissioned writers, academics, creators and makers to contribute a written snapshot into how artificial intelligence is changing, enhancing and challenging creative writing and publishing practices.  

Authors are innovators. Many writers are using artificial intelligence tools for creative prompts in their work, to spark their imagination, to save time on research, and to assist with administrative processes.  

In this respect, generative AI is a virtual collaborator, an assistive tool that helps to augment human creativity, a tool which is being used by some authors as an exciting partner in creativity.  

Award-winning writer and member of the Society of Authors, Hannah Silva is one such writer who is confronting big ideas through innovation and a playful approach to language and technology. Their book, My Child, the Algorithm (Footnote Press UK/Softskull Press North America), weaves memoir and fiction through conversations with a toddler and an early open source language model, exploring queer single parenting and love. As a result of their success, it was named one of Granta’s Books of the Year 2023.  

Yet, there is a real concern among authors that AI-generated outputs will flood the market and cannibalise their book sales. To mitigate these risks, safeguards need to be implemented and existing regulation needs to be respected and strengthened.  

While some may view AI as a competitive threat, authors are not against AI per se. What they oppose is the use of their copyright-protected work being used without permission or payment by companies such as Meta, which has allegedly used 7.5 million books and 81 million research papers that have been illegally uploaded to the online shadow library Library Genesis, to train its AI model, Llama.  

Copyright infringement aside, creators need to be part of this technological transformation, working with government and tech companies for mandatory transparency, clear labelling and clarity on the copyright position when AI is used in creative works. 

UK Government is currently grappling with these issues with the aim of supporting the creative industries (one of its eight growth sectors in its Modern Industrial Strategy) whilst also championing the development and implementation of AI. Without safeguards in place, AI is more likely to cannibalise authors’ livelihoods. When tech companies do not respect copyright, and use protected materials to train their language models without permission or payment, authors lose out.  

Author incomes have been falling for decades. The Authors’ Licensing and Collecting Society’s most recent survey into authors’ earnings showed that the median income of a full-time professional author had fallen by more than 60% in real terms since 2006. That report was published back in 2022 – before the impact of AI had even begun to take hold.  

In January 2025, we surveyed our 12,400+ members. The responses provided invaluable evidence and reinforced the points made in our submission to government about the irremediable damage that unregulated AI is having on authors’ ability to sustain a living income.  

But I will end with a vision of hope: no matter how sophisticated these large language models become, my view is that humans will still want to connect with other humans.  

Artificial intelligence is going to improve our lives in myriad ways, and as a creative collaborator, there are gains to be made, but will AI do our creative work entirely? I think not.  

Creativity brings us joy and improves our wellbeing. As humans, we care about what other humans think, feel and create. The Society of Authors exists to promote, protect and support authors of all kinds, and we will continue to celebrate the power of books made by humans. If we lose human creativity, we risk the loss of our empathy, of critical thinking and of our shared humanity. We must hold on to that.