I know that AI is a controversial topic, but as someone who works in marketing, I think my approach is more nuanced than the black and white thinking some people have about it.
First, let me clear, I have NEVER and will never use AI for this blog. This is something I do for fun and it would lose it’s heart if I used AI, even if it would help me do this faster. I don’t even do a lot of the things I know as a marketer that would maybe help it perform better in search engines… because that’s not the vibe I want here.
I don’t think AI belongs in the arts, I don’t need AI art or AI books, those things need humanity behind them, they are what feed the soul and we need them to be human.
However, what I am seeing is a number of job descriptions that are asking for experience using AI in your workflows.
I am also seeing that creating content (in a marketing context) that’s designed to compete in AI search engines has gone from a ‘nice to have’ to a necessity. Also, if you don’t use AI to help generate content, but your competitors are, you as a human, cannot keep up with that level of content production. So, it’s become a necessary evil in that world.
Thing is, I am neutral about this type of AI content because content is this context has always existed for the purpose of search engines. It is what I refer to as ‘seo fluff’. Even with Google trying to change it algorithms to prioritise ‘useful’ or ‘relevant’ content, it was still about keywords and words for the sake of pleasing search engines. This is just the newest version of it. Everyone knows that this content isn’t useful to them when they read it on websites. Even if they aren’t aware of the purpose it serves, they skim past it to the product descriptions, the images, how they buy, reviews etc etc
Also, controversially, I don’t know if it’s having the impact on junior roles some people think it is. Because, in marketing at least, roles have been compressed to the point where one person is doing several people’s job, so they wouldn’t be hiring a junior person regardless. AI just helps the senior or mid-level person doing junior person jobs alongside the rest of their responsibilities do it a little faster. Plus, for years now ‘entry level’ roles have required non entry levels of experience – junior roles have been a mythical thing for a while.
I do think we’re creating a crisis that’ll hit us in ten years, where there is no-one or fewer people in mid-level roles to move up, because there were no roles for them to come up within… but that’s an issue that predates AI.
BUT I also think AI needs to be tool you use to help you, not a replacement for actual skills and knowledge. I think it’s a necessary evil so you can do things at the speed that people who don’t feel icky about using it do, I think people will start to get left behind if they don’t use it at all.
However, content produced wholly using an AI generation feels like it. Also, when I did get pushed into using these tools regularly professionally to speed up content production, it was shocking how fast I started to lose touch with basic skills I’d spent nearly 7 years in the industry learning.
I’ve literally had conversations with people where they were unable to come up with ideas, or write a basic email, without the help of ‘Chat’… working professionals with YEARS of experience.
So, I think, use it as a tool that help you do things faster. Learn how to use it while jobs are prioritising it (this bubble may burst soon). But, it cannot replace real world skills and experience. A good example is people who use it to write code, yes it’s a tool that helps you write the code faster, BUT, you need to understand coding to suss out if what it’s giving you is correct… so you don’t implement code that takes out your entire infrastructure.
For those who are hard line, ‘if I see something AI I won’t engage with it’… let’s leave Debra who makes the village fete poster using AI alone. If she used a Canva template and muddled through changing the text… would you feel that’s superior? If you’re viewpoint is that the person who made the Canva template would get paid for their work by her using it, then fair, but if you’re just like angry on the principal… then you’re leaving no room for nuance. And that’s not realistic, it’s not real life.
I think the hype around this will die down, especially with how strong the anti-AI movement is, plus, human-made or hand-made art will naturally become more valued as AI gets associated with mass production.
But I can’t sit here and hypocritically say I’m morally against using at all, I think it has spaces where it belongs and is useful, and spaces where it doesn’t. I know there’s some people who outright judge others for using it, and I understand why, I also know people who trust it too much and rely on it too much. I think a balance between the two is the approach people should take.
Anyway, that’s my thoughts, what do you think?
Antonia Bernardin 