Why Did I Become an Editor in an Era of AI?
Photo by Emiliano Vittoriosi on Unsplash
As an emerging literary editor, sometimes it seems like my passion career is dead on arrival. By 9 PM most evenings, I am on my laptop scrolling through countless poor-paying gigs on Upwork. By 10 PM, I am comparing my rates to other editors on Fiverr, racing to the bottom. By 11 PM, I am searching for editing gigs through LinkedIn. Before I know it, it’s midnight, and even though I crawled into bed to sleep, I am on my phone, debating on whether I should sign up for Reedsy or sign up to drive for DoorDash instead. By 1 AM, I am doomscrolling on Facebook. I see editors arguing with each other about God knows what this time and I see writers arguing with each other about AI more than they do about actual writing.
Too tired to continue doomscrolling, I rest my phone on my chest as I lie there in the dark, staring at the ceiling. My screens are off, but my “freelance editor” mode is still on. I become more aware of my thoughts with no dopamine to occupy my mind. How can I find my ikigai as an editor? What will it take for my editing career to gain traction? And why, why, WHY did I decide to become an editor now that generative AI threatens to take over the literary industry and the human race as we know it?!
I start comparing myself to Generate AI, my mind pleading to race against itself. No! I refuse to allow it! I am a father and fiancé. My family depends on me. I take deep breaths. I carefully clench and relax one part of my body at a time. I lose the tension in my chest and shoulders. My thoughts slow down. Things are a bit clearer. I begin to remember the reasons why I became an editor in the first place—those are the same reasons why editors matter now more than ever in spite of generative AI.
1. Generative AI cannot replace the experiences of writing, editing, or reading that I am looking for.
Nor can it replace learning how to do those things on my own accord. Sure, AI is a tool that can provide writing prompts, book suggestions, and style advice. And many menial tasks can be automated by AI with a reasonable level of quality. But reading, editing, and (now) writing are the very things that I love to do, so I am not going to automate them.
Especially not my editing services. There is a deeply profound experience in learning about someone and providing feedback on how they can share their stories. I have the privilege of developing bonds with writers in ways that others cannot. Sure, anyone can provide feedback on a cover letter or résumé. And using AI is a quick, easy, and free way to obtain a very specific degree of cleanliness. However, as an editor, I am developing a skill that generative AI never can: knowing when and how to provide creative judgement in one-on-one settings based on lived experiences. Our tools and technology will simply never understand the impact of artistic liberties in the way that we do, because that’s not what it is made for.
2. Editing makes me an effective communicator. AI does not.
I am no art aficionado or syntax junkie. However, I do enjoy discovering deeper meaning within someone’s written work. I find it amazing that every person has a unique voice that sounds different based on its medium and audience. With verbal communication, I may get tongue-tied or distracted by my own speaking abilities. While editing, I can focus completely on what the writer has to say. They have my full attention, making me one the most loyal readers that they will ever have. Engaging in the material in this way brings me closer to the written text, and by proxy, the writer.
It is not until I have fully engaged with a written copy where I can confidently suggest changes at the micro, meso, and macro levels. If I were to use generative AI as a communication shortcut, I would rob myself of that and the writer of my integrity. Effective communication requires active listening; thorough examination of a writer’s message is exactly that.
3. I can consult, coach, and guide writers in ways that generative AI cannot.
AI cannot help someone find their voice nearly as easily as an experienced editor. If a competent writer only needs mild copyediting, then sure—AI can help them with most of that. Just be careful, because AI (and autocorrect) can still leave grammatical mistakes, both objective and subjective ones. I am not infallible either, but I often catch errors that AI simply cannot. Inconsistency in voice, style, and authenticity often go unnoticed or are exacerbated when I experiment with generative AI.
AI doesn’t learn or inform writers in the way that humans can. There may be times where that is helpful, as not every query needs to be tailored to the end user on an intimate level.
Writers who have not already found their voice and style need a human who connect with them in a way that an AI character or machine simply cannot. Seeking feedback from an editor like me rather than AI is the differentiator between generic advice and guidance that boosts creativity.
4. I am a literary editor because connecting with other people about their written stories means something to me.
I specialize in editing personal statements, cover letters, and memoirs because I enjoy reflective written work. Okay, cover letters are not always very reflective, but they still represent the applicant in a way that other content cannot! In other words, my evening readings and edits are arguably as human as they get. If I am reading an online post or article that I even feels was secretly AI-generated or heavily written by AI, I have immediately lost interest and faith in whatever it was intended to be. LinkedIn is the most egregious source of grief for me at this time. It is hard to not feel like every suggested post on my feed is treating me like a mindless consumer—another datapoint to further drive engagement and therefore ad revenue. If a writer or corporation could not bother to write something compelling, why should I invest my own time and energy into reading it?
I am one of the many who does not want to read or edit AI-generated content. I doubt my opinions and feelings on AI-generated writing will change despite entering an era where its content becomes nearly indistinguishable from respectable writer’s. I choose to read and edit content made by humans because I want to learn about the person behind the text. Quality isn’t the sole determining reason why a piece of writing should exist. I could have used Generative AI to create an entire blog post in the blink of an eye. Yet I chose to write this myself because of the intrinsic experience that came with it. Writing this blog post helped me learn more about myself. Editing helps me learn about myself, too.
A person or business using generative AI to produce written copy obviously isn't going to shell out for a human to editing their content. And that’s okay with me—those people and businesses would never have been my client to begin with. Clients and employers can replace jobs with AI, but they can never replace actual people and their experiences. Generative AI has its place in the writing industry, and so do I.
I haven’t been the best at turning off my freelance mode before bedtime. But the more I work at it, and the more precious family time becomes, the easier it gets. I close my eyes and fall asleep. Tomorrow will be another great day to be an editor.
Terra Hoy
