Everything Is Content - AI Gae Guy, Literary Witch Hunts & Media Hounding

Episode Date: August 21, 2026

Hello EICroquettes! We are so back and Oenone has fallen for a new conspiracy, it’s like we’ve never been away. We’re bursting to the seams with two weeks of what we’ve been loving: from memes to literature - as always, we’re across it all. Enemy of the pod Sam Altman has found himself as the subject of a hilarious (and believable to some) series of memes created by Frosted Jake. Is this the ultimate punch up? Or did Frosted Jake inadvertently create a pitch perfect ChatGPT ad?Once again, the world of literature has been dominated with discourse around AI use in publishing. Have we ushered in a new era of AI witch-hunts? And why are non-white authors being disproportionately targeted? We also discuss the tragic news of Dr Jason Arday’s death and consider the responsibility of the media’s reporting around it. We know that this is an upsetting topic - so we just want to give you a heads up that this comes at the end of the episode. Have you been at the Edinburgh Fringe? DM us with your dispatches: we want to hear about the best shows, your favourite new talents, and if any of you saw Amanda Knox’s show. LINKS:SUBSTACK GOOD LAW PROJECTJason Arday, ex-Cambridge professor at centre of plagiarism row, found deadNathan Cofnas, the man at the centre of Arday plagiarism row, was dismissed for views on raceLauren's postJake Schroeder Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I'm Beth. I'm Richerra. And I'm anony. And we are so back. This is everything is content, the podcast that explores the why behind viral stories. We cover everything from celeb gossip to tech trends, discourse and the latest releases. We're the bookmark of culture showing you everything you need to be in the know. This week on the podcast, we're looking at the return of online witch hunts. Has AI ushered in a new era of public shaming? And what happens when this becomes a moment? meme. You can and you should follow our lovely and totally independent podcast on Instagram and TikTok and also substack at Everything is Content Pod for behind the scenes content and a chance to get your opinions included in future episodes. And please also make sure you've hit follow on your podcast player app so you never miss an episode. And without further ado, I have missed asking you both. But what have you been loving this week, all these past couple of weeks, whichever you fancy?

Well, I haven't known what to watch because I haven't had YouTube to tell. me what to watch. So it's been real struggle. One thing, and I wonder, Routher, if you're going to mention this as well, is Big Dog. Yes. Oh my God, of course. Obviously, we did have our cheeky couple of weeks off, but Ruchera and I, and also Mr. Routherer, we went to Hammersmith to see Big Dog, which a preview of a play, which is currently playing up in Edinburgh, which we did mention this at the top of one of our re-releases, but I wanted to get into kind of proper detail about it, because it was the last thing I saw kind of of cultural note. And I thought it was class. I thought it was so good. It's basically it's an Izzy Radford play and it's about a woman who

goes to work at a true crime digital creation agency kind of thing. And it's basically her and two others who create the content, write the script, do all the back end stuff for this big, massive, hugely popular true crime creator. And it's really, it's so funny. It's like the kind of fun girly pop office vibe. But then there's these moments where you go, oh my God, what they're doing is creating viral content about women who have been horribly murdered. And there's this faceless face. I forget the name of the creator, but this kind of faceless head of the company that is just the front of this and then these like underlings. And it's so, I thought it was really good. It was very, very funny. Izzy Radford is someone that I'm sure you guys would have seen online.

She is also, as it happens, an EIC listener, which is a really nice full circle moment. But yeah, I love this. And I want to know people, one, have gone to see this in Edinburgh. If not, do go and see it. I think it's on to the end of the month. I want to say something, the ballroom. The gilded balloon. That actually sounds more real. Yeah, Gilted balloon. Thank you, Edinburgh, thank you, Edinburgh. I want to know if people have gone to see it. But also, I kind of want a debrief from Edinburgh. I would love to know if anyone's going to see the Amanda Knox show. So anyone who's up there who listens, and I'm sure there's loads of you. Can you just pile into what's good, what's been the weirdest thing you've seen? And if you saw the Amanda Knox thing and do go and see Big Dog.

Oh, I am so desperate to hear a proper dispatch. That is such a good shout. And yes, just to piggyback on what Beth said, I was laughing so much throughout the play. And I often find plays quite hard to find funny because they can be so theatrical. It's a different kind of humour. And I think it doesn't always appeal to me. But this, full laughs, full belly laughs. The room was just contagious, the atmosphere. Everyone was really loving it. I couldn't go because I was getting the sleeper train to Nuki that night. And the next day I mess to you both and I said, what did you make if it? Was it good? And Beth immediately identified a really core truth about me, which was you would have liked it, but it would have made you want to be on stage, which is so true.

And that is like such a perceptive thing to say, this happens to me anytime I go and see comedy. I'm enjoying it at the same time as sort of fizzing with quite a jealous energy because I'm like, fuck, I would love to be on stage, which actually reminds me while we're on the comedy run, I went and watched friend of the show, Grace Campbell's, preview of her. show The Lady is a Tramp, which is also on Edinburgh, hilarious, great, you must go and see it. I'm really sad. I'm not there this year. That's my real cultural one and then you all have to forgive me because I've got two silly internet ones, which the first one, I hope you know what I'm talking about, but is Shanty Baluga. I do know what this is. Can you remind me? I don't know what

this is. I know what it is, but it's gone. It's like I've stored that bit and then the context has gone. So basically, Shanty Bluga is a fictional digital character created by Courtney O'Donnell, who is a comedian that I've come across. I'm sure you will recognize her. I very much enjoyed her on kind of funny podcast shows. She just seems to be a character comedian. And Shanti Beluga is one of the characters and she's this sort of everyday queen. She's an icon. She's a star. Basically, the premise of the videos is that it's Shanti Beluga just doing normal things. So the most viral, I think, and it's mostly gone viral on X and now it's filtering back over to TikTok where it began is Shanti Beluga introduces herself at Paul Party. And it's quite literally her going over to a group

they're chatting. She goes, hi, I'm Shantibuluga, and she greets them and hugs one of them, and that's the whole clip. And it's, I've noticed a trend of videos like this lately, and maybe you have to see it to enjoy it. And I will link so people can make their own, because I realize I'm not selling this very well. But it's almost like the joke is, it's, you know, in videos, it's kind of like me when I do this, and it's something kind of outlandish and funny. It's not, it's like me when I enter a room and say hello to people, and then someone filmed, they go into the room and say hi, and then that's the end of the video. It's sort of a little bit weird, it's a bit kooky, a bit subversive. Anyway, I think shanty is elevating the form. And I'm

so sad we don't have three shanty heads in the house. I think I've ambiently seen someone talking about it and just not engaged. Because when you described it, I was like, she is talking gobbledygic. I don't know what this is about. Oh, my God. The other one is Shannon Crave. Again, do you know Shannon Crave? Is she the Irish comedian? No, well, I don't think so. I mean, she's from York. I think we'll just say that we don't know what you're talking about. Shannon Crave is just an ordinary woman called Shannon who's changed her name on X to Shannon Crave and you know like Pop Crave which is for no

who doesn't know it's this kind of large popcoch page on X that updates all the hottest stories but she's not updating hot pop culture story she's just being like Shannon was seen getting a coffee with her husband TMZ reports and it's just Shannon Crave and but when I looked at this the first time she had like 1,000 followers

she was doing this for the love of game I think she's got slightly more now but Shannon Crave she just she screams icon to me That's like the accounts that call themselves sort of like Sarah GPT and they're like save water, ask me questions and then people ask some questions and they give really stupid responses. I do really enjoy that. You've just made me realise I haven't gone on X in so long because I've been so massive my book

that I'm actually becoming Richerera. How does it feel? Well, I mean, obviously you've got the book, so it's not true case. I feel a bit sad because I'm kind of missing out on all this great law. This is like the longest time probably that I've not been aware of what other than it's either you write a book and you have a flourishing career or you know about Shanty Bluger, come and join me in the murky, sad waters of being too online. I miss you.

Okay, so does anyone have an actual one to follow my gorgeous three? Okay, I'm going to try and match the amazing diverse recommendations you just gave. I went to see, I got an early screening, sorry to brag, to see teenage, sex and death at Camp Miasba. I think I've said that right. It's almost like saying oat sugar, shake and brown sugar, whatever the thing is at Starbucks. I could never get the word order right and I always get it wrong. Anyway, the film with Julia Anderson and Hannah Einbinder, really, really cool. It's like very abstract looking, bright colors.

It's basically about a franchise that is being revived. And this young, queer Gen Z indie director is at the helm of it. They want it to be quote unquote woke and gay. So they've got Hannah Einbindyndy. into redoing it. Gillian Anderson is the famous lead from the franchise from 20 years ago and they meet and it's very sexy. It's just really gorgeous and I don't know if I've ever seen a film like it. It very much explores what it's like to not feel comfortable in your body during sex and the amazing ways that TV, film, movies can sometimes allow ourselves to enter a different world and

the problems and the kind of confusing beauty of that when it comes to intimacy. Have you guys about this? I've heard of this and I was really, I'm so jealous you went to see it. I'm just looking at the cast now because apart from Hannah and Gillian who side note, so funny that did you see Gillian Anderson and Gene Smart, EG. Hannah Ironbinder's, sapphic kind of older co-stars. They've been a bit of like teasing of like, she's mine, she's mine. Love that. But even Victor's in this, Sarah Sherman. Yes. Oh my goodness me. When is this out? So sorry guys, the GP will get this in two weeks, I think. I think it's like the 20-sum. something of August, but just take my recommendation. It's out in a few weeks. It's really,

really worth it. I think you will love it. Babes, isn't the 20th of August yesterday when when this goes out? Oh, wait, 20 something. 20 something. Oh, sorry. UK release delay. Wait, UK release date, not delayed, August 20th to 21st. So literally today. Or yesterday. Yes. So you can go and see it today or yesterday. Okay. That was my first recommendation. My second one, which we actually were recommended this by Candice Carty Williams, was tiptoe. I watched it over our break and, oh, it is so good. Alan Cummings is just, he's the best. He's the absolute best.

Have either of you started this yet? Because I know you wanted to. Yeah, so I completely forgot. I watched two episodes, but my boyfriend hung it too depressing. It is depressing. So then he was like, can we watch something else? And I was like, I'd been saving it to what, you know, and there's a good show. You're like, I'll save that to watch with him.

And then we got two episodes. in, he was like, I don't want to watch this. So I forgot, I need to pick it up. Did you watch years and years? The other Russell T. Davis show, it's kind of... I didn't. Did you not watch that? No. That was maybe, that was maybe even more depressing and dystopian. That was horrific, but amazing. But this one is, it's basically, it's about these two neighbors. One of them play by Alan Cumming, who's a gay man, who owns a cool kind of liberal bar and his neighbor, who's a builder who's like in a bit of a funk with his work. And it kind of taps into what happens in sort of like internet adult radicalized society. It's very close to the bone. I think it's because

it feels so hyper-realistic. That's why it's really uncomfortable. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I totally understand what your partner meant. It wasn't a fun watch, but it was quite propulsive. And I feel like, especially when you get a few episodes in, the layers and layers of these two people's lives become further and meshed. So it almost becomes impossible not to find out where it all goes to and how it gets to the end, which we're shown right at the beginning. It's one of those where it's like, this thing happens. How did we get here? Blu-blah, and then reverses.

So you're just like, fuck, how do we get here? I need to finish it. That's how I felt anyway. No, I did. I just forgot. I totally forgot. I watched that. I don't remember things unless I have to tell you about them.

Well, take this, everyone, as your reminder, if you haven't already. And then my final, final, final one was I read The Vegetarian by Han Kang. and I'm so late to the train, but I loved that book, and I'm sure you read it too, have you? Yes, so good. I think I read it last year. Oh my God. It's amazing. It's so good. That is another uncomfortable book right at the beginning. I read it on my honeymoon, and the first few chapters, I just felt viscerally like my skin was crawling because some of the narrators, because it flips narration, they're just horrible minds to encompass, but in a really provocative way, I didn't, I didn't, I didn't expect to feel so much reading that book, basically.

Is it 20 years old this book? Is it? Surely not that old. It says it was published in South Korea in 2007, because I started reading this book. I can't actually remember I finished it. And it felt a lot more contemporary. I mean, not to say, sorry, not to age or so on and be like, wow, what an age away

that was. But certainly it feels similar to what we mentioned, what's the thing without men? I, who have never known men. I who have never known men, which, again, is that it's about 30 years old. And just something about it reads as though it was, it was, it was, commissioned much more recently, which I guess is a compliment. Oh, okay, maybe I need to find my copy. Someone in our DMs once said that we should read this as well, or maybe responded to

an only recommending it. Wait, did you recommend it before? I think I might, I think I might have recommended it. I definitely did a reel when I went to a phase of trying to be a book talk of for about a week. But she's also written other books, which I think are meant to be amazing as well. And I did that thing that I love to do, which I love this author. I'm going to read another one and then I never did.

You did for Jonathan Franzen. you're a Jonathan. Oh, yeah. Yes, and I should read. There's too many books. That Sylvia Plath quote I re-posted essay from a sub-sack I'd done where she's like, I can never read all of the books that I want. I can never be all of the people that I want, blah, blah, blah.

And that just runs through my brain all the time because it's so true. Might as well just give that. Yeah, let's just log off. No, I'm joking. So obviously, I did piggyback off Beth's fringe recommendation with Grace's show, The Lady is a Tramp. But the other thing that I've been loving, and I'm two episodes in, is The Shards, which is on Hulu. And it's based on the novel by Brett Easton Ellis, which Ritura recommended, which I didn't

remember, Beths obviously reminded me. And Brett Easton Ellis is obviously the author of American Psycho, and he co-created and co-wrote the show with Ryan Murphy as executive producer and director. And obviously, Ryan Murphy's recent output, we have discussed on the show. We talked about all fours. We talked about love story. But unlike the Kim K one, and actually also, I did like love story, but this is some really good telly. I would say, on a different level from what he's been putting out recently. So it's set in the 1980s in LA and I'm only two episodes in. I think there has been a bit more critique as, because the episodes are kind of dropping in increments.

But thus far, it is one of the most beautifully shot TV shows that I have watched in a very long time. The actors are beautiful, including Kaya Gerber, who I actually think isn't that bad. And also she isn't the only Nepo baby because Homer Gear is also in it. Anyway, Richard Gizan. Richard Gisan. So the characters are obnoxiously gorgeous, filthy rich, cocaine snorting teenagers. You're about to say Caucasians. Say it.

They are. No. Cocaine, snorty teenagers. And they all live in, like, beautiful mansions in Belair and Beverly Hills. And the central character, the narrator, is a fictionalized 17-year-old version of Brett Easton Ellis. And he gets, right at the beginning, gets really obsessed with the shining, which kind of sets this kind of tone of terror. there's all of these rumors about this serial killer swirling around and that is all against the backdrop of these filthy rich gorgeous teenagers

having beautiful pool parties as slowly but surely it gets gory and gory in the background so I am loving this so far and I really want you both to watch it have either of you started it yeah so I am four episodes in and don't hate me I don't like it but it's only because I really like the first two episodes it's because they've diverted from the book later on, which I feel like many such cases I've brought this before. We've all said this. If you have an attachment to the book, I feel like I'm just watching it being such a freak about it. I'm like, oh, I don't remember this on page 50, blah, blah, blah. And it's bothering me because I loved the book so much. So that's my cross to bear. I think it looks

so visually gorgeous. The characters are so they're kind of enticing to watch. It's just like euphoria in the 80s vibes a little bit. And then also, oh, what's the name? Evan Rachel Woods as Debbie's mum with that kind of Scarface, Michelle Pfeiffer, Cunty Bob. Oh, made me want to die. That is so funny because I was actively, I'd seen a couple of reviews that were talking about the later episodes and I didn't read them because I hadn't watched it yet, but I'd seen that people were saying it was getting worse and now I'm really annoyed because I just thought it was spectacular. But maybe I haven't read the book, so maybe I'll have more generosity in my viewing. Yeah, you might just enjoy it. I think it looks like it would probably be fun to watch. Like I said,

I'm being a freak about it. Well, I'm going to read the book because I wanted to read the book when this came out and I just thought, I'm going to read the book first. So once I finish the book, I will watch this and then I'll have the full perspective. What I have been enjoying about this since not having read or watched it is Kyah Gerber is saying some quite hilariously fun stuff at the moment. Did you see that she said that she was possessed as a child? And then another pull quote was, I do feel as though I attract beings from the other dimension in a very casual and chill way. Basically, her parents thought, I think,

they thought that she was possessed as a child and then had an exorcism. Her mom gave her Holy Water when she was in the kind of horror story spin-off. They sound insane these people in a really fun Hollywood way. And I'm just seeing these headlines. I mean, she's only 24. I mean, quite wise to be like, listen, I was possessed. I attract beings. It's very casual and chill.

I kind of am a fan of her actually I've said it before and I'll say it again but I would love to be exercised I really think it would be nice a little lobotomy a little exorcism just because there must be some kind of something floating it would just be nice

it's like a colonic irrigation of the soul just like sweeping the cobwebs out that kind of thing isn't it quite violent exorcist I mean I've seen the exorcist that does not look fun what about a little bit Reiki I'd love Reiki or just a colonic yeah or a colonic

but apparently they're not meant to be good for you I don't know let's get one of those Oh my God, you spinning around the room. Even in the show, because I think she's really good. She has, like, a wisdom about her. Like, she is really young, but I really believe her acting. Like, I do, she's giving me good vibes. Sometimes the nepo's are all right.

I was actually going to bring this as one of my things I've been loving, but gratefully, you girls agreed to do it with me as a segment. Because one of the things that I've been loving is watching Frosted Jake's Unfolding Saga about Sam Altman and their love mask. on Grindr. So if you haven't been watching, comedy musician Jake Schroeder at Frosto Jake on Instagram began a week's long saga earlier this month when he published screenshots from what looked to be like OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman trying to hook up with him on Grindr. And then the person

who appeared to be Altman claimed to be lonely and horny and the situation just unraveled further and further and he just kept publishing more screenshots. The next set of screenshots were allegedly from OpenAI's legal team basically saying, take these down. It's like really ruining the reputation of our CEO. These were really convincing. So I knew the grinder was fake, but then when the legal emails came in, I was like, oh my God, this is real. And one of the emails they offer him compensation. He then writes a song about should he take the money. If you haven't ever seen Frost a Date before, by the way, guys, you need to and watch. He does amazing kind of like satirical songs.

comedy. He did a really good one about Erica Kirk, which is pinned to his page. Anyway, he then, the setup like transpired even further. He said they were going to meet up in Bali for Boba Tea. It went a bit wild. So this might be the latest conspiracy that Anoni's fallen prey to, but Beth, what did you think? Did you know this was a joke straight away? I, very, very beginning of this, when I first saw on Twitter, obviously, it's where I go on my internet, I saw this and I thought, oh, maybe this is true. The minute I looked into it, I went, oh, it's this guy. But I did think for a second, I thought, oh my God. This guy is about to wind up, like vanishing from the internet and have a big lawsuit against him. And then I was like,

oh, wait, this is a very clever bit. I mean, he is so talented. I don't know this guy as satirical. I had just seen him doing his name videos. I think it's the same guy when he's like, Ruggira, you're in your podcasting era. I can't think of any way. He does like a kind of rhymy thing. That was really good. I was good, isn't it? I can't think of anything else now. Ruggina. You got a good career. clear no you are very clear okay sorry I've accidentally it's hard see he's so talented because that was very difficult that's who I know him as I didn't know he did this sort of stuff so you should really go and check him out because he does do

really funny videos alongside the name videos he's just I think he's so clever and at the same time I did feel really duped when I realized because I really bought into it my sister was sending it to me because I was actually reposting all of the videos and she was like I don't understand like what is this and I was like explaining it all I was like so he did this video then opening I sent him like a cease and desist. She was like, is it real? I was like, the grinder thing's not real. So I was so invested in it being true. And then when he did this picture that was like him holding a boba with a sad face, I was like, oh no. And then I actually, I can't lie, I feel a bit like let down and sort of got the hump with him a bit. With Sam Altman or with

Jack? Oh, well, always with Sam Altman. But with Foster Jake, I am. Jake, sorry. Babes. Yeah, you let me But I mean, it was great entertainment. It's one of those things. You know everyone's kind of constantly saying whenever there's a mad news story going like, okay, we've got four unique original sentences left. This feels like one of those sentences. It's kind of just like famous online comedian goes viral,

posting fake grinder screenshots of horrifying AI overlord. It's like none of those words were in the Bible. I mean, I kind of find it a bit delightful that it functions as a clever bit of commentary. If Sam Altman wants to make and chill this technology that allows us to falsify at massive scale, reproduce photos, videos, screenshots with like alarming accuracy. The very least you're going to get is people using it against you and kind of making fun of you. You have unleashed hell on this earth Samal and you will not see heaven. I kind of do think anyone who is becoming, I mean, I hope he doesn't, but if he does become

richer than God, which I think is his plan, alter society irrevocably using a technology that's like boiling the oceans and fucking up communities. I think you can be mocked a little bit, you know? and I hope that there's at least some hurt feelings involved. So that's slightly satisfying. I was about to say the exact same thing. It feels like even though it's very funny on the surface, it actually is just utilising his own tools against him,

which I feel like makes this a harmless crime really. If it was any other kind of situation where you get dragged into kind of public shaming and just mocking or whatever, obviously I have quite a black and white rule and feeling. about that. But with this, it does just feel like really funny comedy that is so clearly punching. I guess like at this point, a billion points up rather than down. So I have no problem with it. And you need to watch as a series because the other thing is people like, this should be a musical. It's so clever the way he executes it and tells this story.

But what was really fascinating was in the comments, at one point people were going, is this an ad for chat ch pt? Because when he got to the point where the legal team in of Ashcombers were sending him emails being like, we know you're going to post this. People were sending to get quite endeared to the interaction that was happening and then trying to it into like a meet cute setup between Sam and Jake. And Jake kept having to be like, why do people keep saying this? It's not an average at GPT. Because I think the human, oddly, even though it obviously wasn't intention, his intention, I very much believe his intention was this idea to flip it on its head and say, fine, if you're going to unleash the beast, I'm going to, you know, use it against

you. The irony being that somehow along the way he accidentally humanised this company to the point where people were going Wait, are you, is this an advert? Like, as in it was creating positive feelings of them people, but you need to go watch it literally from the first one and look at the screenshots. It's like it is genuinely

a musical. He's an incredible talent and I believe very shortly we will see him doing some really spectacular stuff and the comments, people are witty as hell, I wish I had them out, but I'm using my phone to film myself, is just good. It's a really good riot. It makes me sad that we're so marketing pilled, that everything, everything could be an ad.

It really is such covert marketing in so many different ways that it doesn't surprise me. People would think this is an ad. It would just be a very creative one. That is so depressing. I've run out of interesting things to say because in my head I'm just trying to think of an Anoni song now. Anoni. You love news stories that are phony. Oh my God.

This man is a genius. Does he do these things on what's it called when you pay people? Cameo. Beth McColl. She has a whole. Oh. Okay. Right.

Your band. At least it's better than Beth, because what rhymes to with Beth? Bad breath and meth. Yeah, I couldn't think of anything wrongs with Bell. Oh, that was quick, though, bad breath and mess. Beth does math. Yep, brilliant. Bethany.

She's got a Fanny. Why do all of yours rhyme? See, my name is not ripe for this. No, I think it's a lonely. Phony, lonely. Blow me. No, my uni friends used to call me Mony Snorba. instead of a nony format because I was always complaining and I was always snoring.

Oh, so you did deserve it then. No, no, I did. Yeah, I used to snore so badly. I've quit. Literary agent Lauren Kay, or Lauren Kay writes on Instagram, published a post last week titled, I'm so sick of the AI witch hunts. And in it, she critiques the rise of vibes-based online campaigns against writers that usually start off and Reddit or YouTube and then end up spreading like wildfire into more mainstream publications. In the last three high-profile cases of writers being accused of AI, two were black indie writers who broke the mainstream, and she writes, I refuse to pretend that that's a coincidence. Lauren throws up a lot of interesting points, including AI is constantly evolving, that lots of our original tells for its use are already outdated, and there's no one standard for what is AI writing.

And still, everyone is confidently accusing one another of it. In the case of the most recent black writer accused of AI use for his book, Call Me, I'll Hide the Body. Deadline reported it was sold in a $2.4 million deal with a follow-up. Agents have since withdrawn selling the book since the accusations became mainstream. A friend of the podcast and writer-journalist, Moia Lothian McLean, responded to Lauren's Post actually directly, saying, one, yes, there is a heightened focus on black writers in the industry,

achieving massive book deals or getting prices. See, Jamir Nazir, granted. scandal. This is what Simeon Brown calls, quote, an intellectual stop and search. Two, but that doesn't negate the fact that these writers used AI to the degree it was obvious and egregious. These weren't seven rounds of edits from talented writer texts. They shouldn't be excused on the basis others have yet to be found out. And then she added, the ultimate injustice here is that publishing is so unimaginative and patronizing towards black writers that it accepts bad, sloppy work and throws money at it when there are extraordinarily talented black indie authors getting dust

from the industry. So it's a really, really complicated debate that is raging on. And I have noticed so many posts talking about this since Lauren put hers out. I have to say I was reading Moy's post and I could definitely agree with it from the point of view that I've definitely felt this about South Asian authors before. There was a trend a few years ago and I was speaking to another friend about this and we were both talking about how a lot of not a lot but like a few of the books that had you know really got big publishing pushes and marketing pushes were books that we just couldn't really understand the backing behind but they were these south asian books that were meant to be kind of diaspora books talking about um you know these kind of crazy wild goose chases

that would often then cross the oceans to india and then come back to the UK and they just kind of felt quite samey and they didn't feel like some of the best writing that I have experienced from writers, you know, from the same communities or similar communities to me. And I just, I found it quite confusing. And then we both landed on the point that I wonder if in the push to kind of diversify publishing, rather than actually reaching out or finding authors with a high level of writing or interesting diverse perspectives, it just was easier to kind of publish a similar type of book because it was manageable, repeatable, easier to do. I'm not sure if people will agree with me, but that is something that I have thought before, to be honest. I think that's such an interesting

perspective. Obviously, from my own lived experience, I don't have an experience of being racialized within my work in that way. So I think more broadly, the use of AI in books is something that I can speak on more fluently and I find very interesting, especially in the wake of, and I'm not you guys have both seen this, but Claude Anthropic, have released a new update, which says that any text generated within Claude will now carry a watermark. So that means, including if you uploaded some texts, asked it to correct the grammar, you then copy that text out of Claude, it would carry this invisible watermark, which no one would notice, no one would see, but they are going to release like this AI detector. That means when it's plugged in,

it will carry this special code. It's not only exclusive to things you copy out. If you get Claude to generate a set of words, a sentence, a paragraph, the words, the order of the words in and of themselves carry the code. So even if you got it to write something and then you typed that on your phone, then copied that onto your laptop, they would carry the code. And I think that this is the only way forward in terms of AI to make it really fair, because I agree, I think there is a tendency towards this witch hunt. We know that AI detectors at the minute don't work. We've seen that people are uploading centuries old books and they're coming up as 67% written as AI on Pangram, because I think it is just another way with which we are finding means to penalise

often more marginalized people and voices. And I think that all of the other AI sites, I didn't know what they're called, under this law, are going to implement similar things. Things will be watermarked. And I feel like that's such a relief because I do think with AI, everyone is kind of siding each other. And there is a fear that even within writing that you didn't, I keep doing this. I'm like, I write a sentence. I'm like, is that like an AI is it? Am I writing like I'm a bot to bring a bit of light to it? I think that with that regulation changing, that will hopefully stop these kind of witch hunts that we're seeing. Yeah, I find this so mentally difficult to navigate, obviously. And I do, you know, even in calling

these witch hunts, I think it's, you acknowledge that even if AI was used, case by case, with the racial bias that we know is out there, especially in publishing, especially on the internet, the lack of historic care that's been given to non-white authors, even if you have, you know, in one case, a black author doing it or accused of doing it, a white author accused of doing it, the treatment of those two is different. One is much more likely to become a witch hunt. So it's not even, I don't want to excuse the use of AI because I think in these cases, I don't know. I have been, I'm a white author who loads AI, who is currently writing, a book who has been assured in conversations. I mean, I don't use it for anything because I am

quite nervous about it. And also, I just, is nothing my brain can't do at the moment that I would need a AI for. But I am being assured that there is enough robust ways of doing this. A publisher who has invested five, six figures into a book will not withdraw that book from the shelves or from pre-publication or anything unless there is robust evidence and not just this is flagged on one system. It would have to be. Humans who read it would have to be. But again, that is me putting my faith in publishing who perhaps don't know, you know, perhaps they just don't know what they don't know. And in the case of Mia Ballad, which we covered, I know that she, there was a murky grey area where it was like, well, she says I didn't do it, but it could

have been done second to me. I don't know the other authors. I mean, it does sound like there's cold hard denials, which is so difficult. Publishers saying we had reasonable right, an author's saying, but I didn't do it. I mean, this is the absolute nightmare that is AI. One thing we do know is, I think I'm just trying to list it as facts to keep myself straight. Any author that uses generatively of AI without disclosure should expect upon discovery that their book deal is compromised, that the book is withdrawn. I don't think that's an unfair outcome. But also alongside that, black authors are massively underrepresented. And as I say, historically far less protected and subject to harsher scrutiny, that is the group. This is the area that we need to look at,

which is not, it's just not as simple as AI bad, punish AI the same, because that's not how it works. It will be an unequitable punishment. And I think, I think Moyer makes an excellent point as well, that if publishers, publishers should shoulder the blame for this. You know, if you're only publishing sparsely, you know, in popular internety books, if you're not spending money on discovery of excellent black writers who exist in untold numbers, if you funnel money there instead of just trying to win book talk once every six months with your one black author, the landscape of publishing can change and this wouldn't happen. So I think it's a case of many moving parts is so difficult to talk about. But so I'm just trying to separate it in my own mind of like, what is true?

what are people saying what can we not ignore? I really agree with that and I do think ultimately it makes me frustrated at the publishing industry that doesn't really actively seek out an actual diversity of writers, not just racially but from voices, that obviously there is an appetite. Many of the authors who do undergo this, as Sylvan Brown says, intellectual stop and search, get to such high levels because there is an appetite for unique, writers and unique perspectives. And then they're almost like completely toppled down from these accusations of AI. And again, I will not go into whether they have used AI or not, because I do

agree, as Lauren says, I have no bloody idea what AI writing looks like anymore. The whole concept of that I find really difficult and just confusing. And apart from a personal anxiety of how it's made me feel about my own writing, I have no way of ever casting aspersions on other people because I don't even get what it looks like anymore. So I won't go into that, but just even observing from the sidelines this meteoric rise of multiple black writers and then the topple effect, it feels awful, it feels horrible. It's like just really uncomfortable to watch, very uncomfortable to wonder how their lives are after and if they're doing okay, because it is a massive kind of public shaming that they undergo

through this process and their name will always be attached to these allegations, the amount of Google searches attached to AI and then insert name of these writers. It's reams and reams and reams because it gets so big and obviously the results are so catastrophic that that becomes story after story in and of itself. I also worry about the impact of just, you know, a very problematic industry rather than taking the more difficult path of looking introspectively and thinking, maybe we need to commission differently. Maybe it will just be even more risk of us and just commission less, you know, black writers,

less writers of color in response to this because it then has their name attached to these stories. That's what I'm kind of sat with at the minute. So I think you've both very expertly shepherded me to a conclusion, which is what I was grappling with and trying to understand, but through what you've just said, talking about the publishers, was talking about the element of the witch hunt.

The issue really is the fact that these authors have been stuck up with their heads on a parapet to the masses. I think that publishing houses do really want people to feel like they are taking the charge against AI, that they're making active choices to stop AI-generated prose being in fiction or books that they publish. However, this should and could have happened much earlier on. I know that this like detective software that I spoke about isn't out yet. But like you said, if you're a really prolific reader, I can't always spot AI because it has changed.

And I also think that humans also started mirroring AI writing because it's around so much. But especially with Shy Gile, the fact that it was people on the internet, kind of internet sleuth saying this is written by AI, which was what then alerted the publishers. To me, that's a massive failure to have got the authors to this point where their books are up for these massive auctions. So their names are going to be sort of more well-known. And then they're getting cut off at this point when they're on this kind of like meteoric rise, which means their downfall is public. There's a world in which they sent in their first drafts and it was properly checked through. And these decisions to pull the book, to not commission the book, to not publish the book,

to not put any money behind this author were made a point before it was public. And I think that is where it sits really uncomfortably that these are non-white authors because it does feel in some way like they are sacrificial lambs. because there are a list, it's like a host of white authors. I mean, James Frey, an American author, famously admitted in 2023 that he used generative AI, and he got a lot of backlash, but then people kind of like what's great that's being open about it.

Anthony Horowitz says that he uses chat GPT, but basically there's been various white authors who have admitted to using AI and generative AI in their writing and maybe cushioned by the fact that they've admitted it, they've kind of got away with it, or also because they're privileged enough, they're already established enough, I'm sure there are other white authors who perhaps won't go through the rigmar that these writers have gone through.

And I think that is where it all kind of hits this point of saying there is a real injustice here, not the fact that their books were pulled, the fact that they were led down this path and kind of publicly crucified. So before we get into the segment, we wanted to give you a brief warning. We will be discussing the recent media reporting and death of Dr. Jason Arde. It's a really harrowing story. so if you need to end here, reach us on our next episode, we completely understand. As a culture podcast, we look at the fun parts of pop culture, but we also examine politics, racism, tabloid ugliness, and the UK more widely.

So we felt a duty to report on this story. So here is a recap of everything that has happened. Dr. Ardade became Cambridge University's youngest black professor in 2023, when he became professor of sociology and education age 37. According to the BBC, accusations of plagiarism first erupted from another academic, a man named Nathan Koffness, who published the allegations in his newsletter this year. Kofness was sacked from Cambridge University in 2024 and described himself as a race realist. To quote a piece in The Observer, Nathan Koffner was fired after claiming that in a true meritocracy,

black people would, quote, disappear from almost all high-profile positions outside of sport and entertainment. and, quote, Harvard faculty would be recruited from the best of the best students, which means the number of black professors would approach 0%. Navarra reported that for three weeks, Dr. Ardei had been at the center of a campaign of public shaming that had turned every aspect of his life upside down. Reporting first began around the allegations of plagiarism and then began scrutinizing all aspects of his life, from claims of his philanthropy to the distances he'd run and his health issues. The spectator published many pieces on him, one of which was titled The Fantastic Truth about Jason Ardei.

The Guardian, the Times, the Daily Mail and the Telegraph, all published multiple pieces about him. In the midst of this, Liverpool, John Maugh's, his former university, conducted an inquiry into academic misconduct and characterised citation problems in Arde's work as honest and reasonable error. But on the 5th of August, Dr Arde resigned in a public letter. he wrote, sadly the years since my appointment have also been marked with an unrelenting level of public scrutiny and personal attack. While criticism is an inevitable part of academic life, what I have experienced has gone far beyond scholarly disagreement. The relentless accusations, speculation and public commentary have taken a profound toll on me and on those I love. On the 14th of August, he was reported dead aged 41.

Since then there has been a vigil in London attended by tens of thousands of people and a growing call for a public inquiry into his death. One sign at the vigil read, shame on the British media, digital lynching. Navarra reported that between the 24th of July 26 when the plagiarism allegations were first reported by The Telegraph and the 14th of August 26 when his death was reported, the British press published 249 articles about Dr. Ardei. People have also pointed fingers at both left and right-wing media, condemning the Guardian and Navarra for their reporting on Dr. Ardei in the lead-up to his death. Journalists and sociologist Professor at Manchester University, Gary Young, shared an excerpt from his essay titled Pigeonhold,

Creative Freedom as an Act of Resistance. It reads, When people talk about the need for black excellence, I counter with an insistence on black mediocrity, the right for black people to be as average, flawed, compromised and mistaken as any other group of people, the right ultimately to be human. And he finished with rest in peace, Jason Ardei. Arde's family also released a statement saying that the public shaming Jason was subjected to

was too much for any man to bear. And some close to Dr. Ardei have since shared that he was extremely vulnerable ahead of his death and they reached out to newspapers to ask them to stop reporting on his well-being. Many have also pointed to the many white British politicians and academics, including Rachel Reeves, who have been found guilty of fabrication or plagiarism and kept their positions. More importantly, they never faced a level of public scrutiny or tabloid attention close to what Dr. Ardei experienced. I was coming back from Newcastle on the train when my partner held up his phone and it was the news of Dr. Arde's passing and I was, I can't remember the last time that I felt such shock and sadness because I think reading everything

that was happening at the time for this to be the conclusion, even though it's so obvious now looking back, was absolutely gutting. Like I just found it so sad. And I think so many people felt that way. I think the quickness with which this escalated. And it's so sad, it's a story we've watched play out so many times now, but I don't think it ever gets any easier. And it's so hard knowing how much we all inadvertently or inadvertently participate in these kind of conversations because of clickbait, because of what's engaging,

because of the things we talk about like virality, and how much of this really, like, needed to happen and how much of it really didn't. I can't remember who said this, but it just brought up this, commentary on it when you were talking. They were saying how being an academic, the level of attention around his name and the amount we know his name is not normal. We do not talk about academics in this way. They are not public stars discussed in tabloids or newspapers. They were just

talking about how the disproportionate level of attention is so extreme. And I would think about it. And I could not tell you the lecturer of sociology at bloody LSE or Oxford. or anything like that. I don't know their name. I'm not supposed to know their name. This is not a world that is tabloid fodder yet this did become tabloid fodder. Yeah, I can't, really, the details of this and that like it's just a gut punch of a story, it's the most heartbreaking outcome and the most predictable. I think it is a kind of splinter of so many different elements to play here. Yes, one of them, you know, it's racism in reporting. It is the internet's bloodlust. It is the fact that we are in this punitive, shame-driven society that is so obsessed with comeuppance that, you know, I'm not going to argue that say there was no intrigue or no interest around this story and no reason that anyone would ever, you know, write a word about it. But plagiarism stories in publishing are not uncommon. And as I'm reading more, nor are they in academia, the fact that this became such, you know, allegedly almost 300, you know, over 250 stories about this.

such a short window. That was driven by clicks and those clicks were driven by people's worst impulses. And I have to believe that online outfits knew that, wanted a piece of the pie. He was an author who had a public profile, but it was not a huge public profile. His book wasn't out. His story and the stories of that, it was still a case to be heard by the relevant institutions. It was not cut and dry. Front page after front page after front page, hundreds of people talking about this. My time was full of it. the globe, not a chance that that was in his best interest or the public's best interest, not in a world where, you know, sex criminals and corrupt governments, even in our own

country, you know, tax-avitting billionaires and business owners, are not held to even even a sliver of that accountability, quote-unquote. I think if you, I just don't think there's one angle here where you cannot, as a sensible person, think something was absolutely rotten here and so many people have been veiled. In fact, the last time, I said I haven't really gone on X, the last time I was on X, my entire feed, it was right at the beginning of this story kind of unfolding more and more. And it was just picture, cover of every paper

discussing Jason Rade. And I remember thinking at the time that it was almost odd, like you both said, because like you say, but there is some intrigue there, there is some interest there. But it is not the crimes that we've seen committed by countless men, white men, privileged men.

And I think that, unfortunately, especially at a time like this, when the right wing are constantly looking for people that they can flay as examples for why they want whatever it is that they believe to be their Britain, whatever it is, just unfortunately play into their rhetoric, which plays into the media that's constantly trying to get attention. And so we have this really disgusting cyclical, symbiotic system at the minute, which means that things like this can happen, because on every level there is someone kind of benefiting and profiting from a malevolent place, whether it's bolstering their own sense of identity, their own argument, or lining their pockets.

And unfortunately, there is always a victim. And unfortunately, historically, it often is someone who already faces systemic oppression. It's honestly just maybe the worst story that's happened in a long time. It's just so, it's so awful. It's so bad. And there are so many aspects, even in the aftermath, which are just honestly making my blood boil. And I guess I need to do a bit of temperature check with you guys, if you have felt like this at all as well. So people have pointed out that the Times ran a paid-for story on X before his death about the claims around Dr. Arde.

They had a very salacious tie. or very much of the vibe of the fantastical Mr. Dr. Ardeh, that vibe. And even after his death, the ad was still running and people were screenshoting it. So they were still making money off the situation, off this story. And it made me feel sick. It made me feel so sick, irregardless of the fact that maybe they weren't able to pull it, the fact that they were making money from this scenario, from targeting an individual, regardless of how many of the claims, you know, were verified, unverified, whatever.

it's not even really about that, it is the narrowing down the microscopic lens of this one person and the level of scrutiny that they invited, along with all major newspapers in the UK, it's not just them, but the paid-for ad, something about that really makes me feel quite sick. And also, many of the newspapers, the Guardian included, the Telegraph included, the Times included, have since published balanced editorial stances, opinion pieces, after and they've turned off comments on social media for some of them and that I found very, very upsetting. And it's really hard to find the right line with this because there's a lot of people now naming and shaming the journalists who predominantly wrote the stories for these papers

and then that's starting a new thread about this which is obviously really difficult and the Guardian and some newspapers have published that they do not agree that their journalist should be getting hatred in return. But I do think if you're a newspaper putting out an editorial like The Guardian has done, which is saying, Jason Arde's death raises questions. This is a quote, by the way, about race institutional authority and what happens when society organizes people around public reputation. If you put that out on Instagram and you turn off comments, I think that is chicken shit. I think you should allow people to have a commentary about your responsibility and your role in it. And I think you should take it. I don't think it's fair to publish an editorial

stance after when people feel really let down and betrayed by your responsibility in this harrowing situation. Do you agree? Totally. And if you want somewhere good to go, I mean, Ms. San Harriman is always incredible on instances of activation and activism. And he shares some really amazing resources and opinions and other writers and voices and people who speak from experience. You can also, if you want to, and we'll put it in the show notes, the Good Law Project have created a petition to demand a public inquiry. And at the time of speaking, it has 111, 887 signatures and they're aiming to get up to 150,000. So it's a very, a small thing you can do, just add your name and click if you feel like this is kind of making you want to do something,

but you don't know what that is. I think to go back briefly to the Guardian and the arguments that institutions like the Guardian are making in this moment, which is saying, well, there was a racial element to this and this did become a right-wing witch hunt, but doesn't mean that all coverage, including ours, is de facto a part of that. And I think there's been a lot of now naming of, which I won't do, but a naming of certain journalists, and one journalist in particular for the Guardian, and a lot of harassment in his direction to say, you are responsible for this, this is your doing. And I do think, you know, the argument being that the hounding has not stopped. It's just we've chosen another figure for it.

There was a piece published earlier today, a day of recording Wednesday 18th, written by Hugh Muir in The Guardian. And I will quote it, slightly long quote, but I think I want to give, I don't want to misrepresent his argument here at all. And he writes,

amid the pain and understandable rage in recent days that had been invective, leveled at the right, but also a deal of social media abuse leveled at progressive journalists, notably black journalists, and especially Guardian journalists, who interrogated and reported on the claims made about and by the professor.

There have been attempts load them with at least partial responsibility for his death. Here's the thing. We are journalists. We are not activists. Often we work with activists and I am very proud to have done so. Often our hopes and agendas coincide and when they do injustices are exposed, wrongs are righted. Sometimes laws and attitudes are changed. But we are adjacent, we are not the same. Activists vary, but almost by definition they seek a means to an end. A good journalist lays out facts. Sometimes those facts push that end further away, sometimes they are unpalatable. And so if it appears that a prominent figure, be they black or white, is being less than honest in ways that meet the test of public interest, those black journalists have a right indeed a duty to interrogate that.

That is the line on one side of this. And in theory, he speaks sense. I just, I think the fact is if you are a journalist covering this and you can see the other coverage and you can see that even if you weigh in with a piece that is, that repeats no racist rhetoric and is seeking the truth, if you can see your. You can see you are adding to a pile where most other outlets or even some other outlets that are huge and not playing fair. I wonder whether that duty then is altered, not just to publish and publish and publish, but to find, or at least to in your publishing invoke a plea for protecting the man at the center of it. I just, I think it is. And maybe that is because we eroded the institution so down. to the bone that even good journalists are actually not able to cleanly do their job. I don't know,

but it just feels there was failures here and I don't think anyone's hands really are particularly clean. I agree. I read that piece as well and I definitely understood where he was coming from. The thing I think was missing was the acknowledgement about the scale. When it gets to that level of stories. You said 250 something in the space of less than a month. That is insane. Having worked at a newspaper, like we do not give that much coverage, even taking a fraction of that, dividing that between the main newspapers. We did not cover anything as much as that, apart from Ukraine at the time. And Trump, for example, it is a huge, huge, huge amount of discourse around one person. It is ginormous. And I think not acknowledging, regardless of the type of

reporting, adding to that scale and amplifying, that is something as well. I think we have rotted the institution to the core. I mean, there has been enough be kind campaigns, post people, known, known figures taking their own lives because of the pressure of the media. And I think it is actually kind of mind boggling. It makes you feel in. insane to watch these patterns play out again. And I think that there is a problem with when everyone's doing it, everyone feels like they are just part of a crowd of people doing this thing. And so they are not personally responsible. And if everyone's doing it, it's fine. And so everyone keeps pushing and pushing and pushing something happens, maybe a couple of people drop out and stop doing it. But it seems

with the way that social media works now as well and the way that this information proliferates, and like I said, like the current temperature, the current climate in the UK, the rise of racism and fascism and right-wing agendas, there needs to be some level of culpability and people need to take more responsibility. And I do think sometimes journalists, as I know you both operate as, can kind of see themselves almost as like a faceless cog within a system that's just doing reporting. And maybe, especially if you're writing for a publication, you can think, I have no personal responsibility. And I also think it's the same for us as consumers of media, certain outlets, that we also have to find a way that these stories aren't able to take off.

But that's kind of much harder to do when there's so many other people who will engage. Yeah, I mean, everything you said is so right about personal responsibility. And that was something that I really grappled with loads working at the BBC, at the I newspaper, because often you'll be asked to do a story and politically don't agree. And thankfully, I worked at places where politics. that wasn't put to the test very much. I didn't, I wasn't really a journalist by the time the genocide in Gaza began and I really am so thankful that I kind of exited around that time because the amount of horrendous media reporting in the last few years especially has been so

destructive and so so impactful in the way the discourse has been shut down around that issue in particular let alone in this case. I do think what you've said is exactly right. There are no faceless cogs, it's everyone contributing to a machine. And I think that culture, that kind of theory is quite pervasive and it's the reason why it keeps ticking. Thank you so much for listening this week. Make sure you tune in to our everything and conversation episodes. We are back. We are back on track every week in your ears twice a week, Wednesdays and Fridays. If you enjoy the podcast, then please do you leave us a rating and a review wherever you're listening to this now, it is really one of our favorite things to do to scroll through them

and to discuss and to just get giddy reading them. So please, please, please make us happy. You can follow us on Instagram and TikTok and Substack at Everything is Content Pod for extra content to take part on our Wednesday episodes and to enjoy some essays, recommendations and listicles and maybe more from us. See you next week. Bye.