Is AI Threatening The Writing Skills Of PR Practitioners?

It is hard to think of a reason why those working in PR wouldn’t make use of spelling and grammar tools. Even the early editions of Word had spell checkers. Some may remember the early indexes that judged the age group your writing would appeal to. A few might recall the ‘fog’ indexes, which graded how clear your writing was.  

‍

However, grammar has always been a more difficult issue. For some time, universities have been encouraging the use of relevant tools to tidy up tenses and check inappropriate usage of adverbs and adjectives. Others allow for careful external reading of theses, and the provision of feedback, prior to submission  

‍

Tools such as Hemingway dig deeper into advising on broader grammar issues. For example, passive sentences are illustrated through different colours. The emphasis is on suggesting how to improve, with an focus on crispness and readability. But the author is always left to make the final choices.  

‍

It’s difficult to suggest these tools don’t aid a writer’s skills. However, today’s thorny subject is the extent to which first drafts of articles or press releases should be originated by AI prompts rather than the individual endeavours of human authors.  

‍

Skilled writers suggest that using AI for first drafts is a blatant act of de-skilling, fearing critical writing skills will diminish over time. Others suggest that using AI to shape ideas for an article can be a positive, extending the pool of ideas we draw from.  

‍

However, over dependency on AI can have two major effects. Firstly, it can remove the complex and challenging task of how to structure written work. Secondly, turning first to AI can be a block on creativity, often the engine room for original and engaging writing.  

‍

Experimentation with AI at Pembroke and Rye has revealed two further points. Work originated by AI is often weaker than writing that begins with a human first draft. Secondly, low quality human drafting may be improved by AI, but it won’t lead to sparkling copy. On the other hand, very well written pieces can be easily polished and emerge as eye-catching copy.  

‍

However, a quick health warning: If you use AI, it is important to carefully check every revision. Before you know it, a ‘machine’ opinion rather than yours can be slipped into a piece. Equally, when AI tools are used, they must preserve confidentiality of any inputs. All AI use must be done transparently and ethically.  

‍

Overall, the use of appropriate tools to improve copy has been a positive influence. But the unmanaged and ill-considered use of AI for origination, must not allow AI to shape and drive out writing skills and outputs.

‍

But let’s not forget that no writing is perfect. Copy can always be improved. One day, human originated work, of a high standard, polished by AI, might find itself at the top of the best seller lists.  

Declarations: this article was polished by AI