There Are No Girls on the Internet - Author Jane Friedman vs. the AI scammers who stole her good name on Amazon GoodReads

Episode Date: August 16, 2023

Writer Jane Friedman has a stellar reputation in publishing. But a huckster, armed with AI impersonations of her writing, was trying to scam folks by using her name on Amazon GoodReads. She raised hell, and last week Amazon finally took them down. But what about new authors who don’t have her huge platform? Who is looking out for them? Jane joins to talk about the threat AI presents to authors, publishing, and the rest of us.   I Would Rather See My Books Get Pirated Than This (Or: Why Goodreads and Amazon Are Becoming Dumpster Fires): https://janefriedman.com/i-would-rather-see-my-books-pirated/ Author discovers AI-generated counterfeit books written in her name on Amazon: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/08/author-discovers-ai-generated-counterfeit-books-written-in-her-name-on-amazon/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed Human. Another podcast from some SNL, late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter.

Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHeart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than adds supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHeart's twice as large as the next two combined.

Learn how podcasting can help your business. Call 844-844-I-Hart. What's up, fam? It's Isaiah Thomas. And I'm C.J. Toledano. It's our favorite time of the year on our podcast point game, the playoffs. We're digging into the biggest surprises of the season. And I'm looking back on some of my greatest playoff moments. If we didn't talk ever again, I was harmed.

You just understood. That's how personal it got. Wow. Then after that game seven, Marquis come in to you, he's like, you know, I love you, dog. You know, it's all love. This was just playoffs. This was just basketball. So listen to Point Game on the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

They are not prepared for what's about to happen or what is already happening, which is this flood of AI generated material being up. There Are No Girls on the Internet as a production of IHeart Radio and Unbossed Creative. I'm Bridget Todd, and this is There Are No Girls on the Internet. Our names hold so much power. When Anna Mae Bullock left her abusive husband, Ike, she famously said that she didn't want any assets. Only the stage name that he had given her. Tina Turner.

So much of our reputation in who we are to the outside world is wrapped up in our names. So what if someone was using AI to scam people? using your name. This is exactly what writer Jane Friedman woke up to find last week. Someone was selling bad AI versions of books with her name listed as the author and selling them on Amazon.

When we sat down to talk about it, I quickly realized that I had Jane mixed up with another woman who was also a big name in publishing who was also named Jane Friedman. Well, you may want to back up and reconsider that question because there's another Jane Friedman in publishing

who is the former suit you of Harper Collins and the founder of Open Road. So you might want her instead for this podcast. Ouch. Embarrassing, right? I know, not an ideal way to start an interview. And I wouldn't ordinarily include my mistakes in the show. But I felt like it highlighted the importance of and complexities around names,

especially in a field like publishing. Jane says that she gets confused for the other Jane all the time. And I was struck by what a head spinner this all was. Jane having to differentiate her name from another Jane in publishing while also going up against Amazon to differentiate her name from an AI-enabled scammer. Well, I hate that I am starting off this interview with a big mistake, but it does kind of feel relevant to the conversation. No, it's totally all right. I completely understand. So I started in publishing right out of college. Actually, while I was still in college, I had an internship at a traditional publishing house. in the Midwest in Cincinnati.

I stayed there for 12 years, which was pretty unusual. Most people hop around in publishing jobs. But I stayed put. I took a detour as a writing professor for a couple years. Went back into publishing, working for a literary journal, the Virginia Quarterly Review. And then around, let's see, this was 2014, I went full-time freelance entrepreneur.

And so as of today, I write, I publish mainly for an audience of writers and publishers. So it's a very meta career that I've developed. Something that I read about you in my research for this, which hopefully is the right chain Friedman, is that you have this reputation of being like an honest broker of information about the publishing space. And it's a space that can sometimes be kind of opaque, kind of murky.

Do you think that's one of the reasons why whoever was trying to use your name to publish these fraudulent books targeted you as someone who is known for, having honest information? It's a fascinating question because I would really love to know what motivated them to target me and my name. Was it actual knowledge of what I do? Or was it some spreadsheet that told them my name ranks well for the topic of ebooks and publishing? And they're just like that, you know, and I was just picked out of a hat. I'm not sure. But certainly there's demand surrounding what I do because I'm seen as trustworthy. And I've, I mean, that's very intentional.

I try to be to give people a 360-degree view of the publishing industry. I don't consider myself necessarily biased for any publishing path. It's really what suits this author at this time, what's going to best further their career goals. I do feel like it is a space where there's a lot of people selling a lot of things, whether it's their course or whether it's, you know, oh, you should be doing XYZ on Amazon. you're going to make so much money. And I think the space can be tough. And I think someone giving people the honest rundown of what's happening is really, really valuable.

Yeah, I think so too, because there are a lot of promises made. Writers are also susceptible to flattery. And there are a lot of people, services, companies that prey on writer's dreams for their work. And I find it pretty shameful because I think what's not really understood is that sometimes there's more money to be made from the writers themselves than from actually selling the writer's work. That's pretty disappointing to hear. Yes, yes it is. And I don't candy coat things. So, yeah, I think that's why people trust me to tell it like it is.

Last week, Jane Friedman was alerted to the fact that someone who wasn't her was publishing books under her name. Those titles were added to her Goodreads author page and Amazon page. So a casual observer would probably think they were written by Jane. Jane tweeted, As of today, there are about half a dozen books being sold on Amazon with my name on them that I did not write or publish. Some huckster generated them using AI. This promises to be a serious problem for the book publishing. world. So you wake up one day and you see a bunch of books on your Goodreads profile.

For folks who don't know, Goodreads is owned by Amazon. What is it, what's your first reaction when you see this? A panic, panic, because I know how hard it's going to be to correct being very familiar with Amazon's procedures and policies, which I've dealt with in the past. I know countless authors who have to deal with this and it's like banging. your head against the wall. And I was notified by someone who was aware of my name and my work, not super, like, fan, but someone who, you know, was just curious enough to go looking for what I've written and published in book form. And, you know, it's these fraudulent books that they stumbled on first. And thank God they had the critical thinking skills to alert me rather than assuming I was

trying some new weird experiment. Like Jane's writing is really, gone down a few notches. Right. Exactly. Okay, so I, like a lot of people listening, a thousand percent assumed that the way that you, that a writer controls what shows up under their name on their good reads page. But that is actually not the case. And so what did it actually look like to get a book removed from your good reads page? Yeah, it's kind of insane. You know, most social media sites or community sites, you do have 100% control over your profile. But that's not the case at Goodreads, nor do they notify you when something has changed on your profile as substantial as a new book has been added. You have no idea unless you're monitoring it yourself.

So if you want to get a book removed from your profile, which, just to be clear, it's automatically added by Amazon. Also, individuals can manually add books to an author's profile. So like any like rando can go and just look for the fine print. You can find it. If you really want to screw with someone, I don't suggest you do that. But if you really had an enemy out there. Anyway, so if you want to get the book removed or books removed in my case, there's a librarian's group. It's a group of volunteers who try to keep the good reads data appropriate, in line, clean, useful. And if you're a If you go into this group, you'll see that there's like thousands upon thousands of requests from authors to have their profiles corrected. And so I just had to join the line. Please correct my profile. So the librarians group, these are like unpaid volunteers? That's correct, yes.

What's wild to me about this is that both the way that it works, this librarians group, and the way that you had to really raise hell on social media to get Amazon to do anything. Amazon is this billion-dollar global company. They don't have people internally who could be paid to keep their platforms reliable, safe, accurate, et cetera, et cetera. It's curious to me that they would not be invested in that and instead are relying on the labor of volunteers and people who have no business doing this. Like, it's not your job to do this as a writer. Yeah, I couldn't agree more. And there are two sets of problems here, unfortunately. There's the Goodreads problem, which that's a company that they bought.

It's been maybe 10 years ago. And they basically bought it and abandoned it. And I've been told by people behind the scenes that the coding of that side and just the whole like structure and ability to change it is not straightforward. So rather than do the right thing and improve it, they're just kind of letting it decay. Is that the right word? It's like, you know, duct tape. That's how it's surviving at this point.

So like I could understand maybe like there's. they don't want to get into that mess. However, the other side of this is Amazon itself and how books get uploaded to their site. And there are more formal processes with what I assume are paid employees looking at these infringement claims, which is what I had to submit. But there are different tiers. And your initial request is going to go to the lowest level tier. And it's like corresponding with AI, ironically.

You don't get any sense of if it's a human being on the other side. You feel like they're going through this really rigid rulebook of, you know, did they provide X? Did they provide Y? And if not, close the case. So they're trying to get rid of you, in my opinion, as quickly as possible. And I have a tiny bit of sympathy just because I've been around writers for so long. A lot of them are going to be upset, annoyed by all sorts of things that happen on Amazon site that really don't constitute infringements. they're what I would call more of an annoyance. And so Amazon must have to filter through

thousands of these things a day. So I get it, but they are not prepared for what's about to happen or what is already happening, which is this flood of AI generated material being uploaded. So when you first alerted Amazon to what was going on, how did they initially react? The person that you reached out to first, what was the vibe? So the first response I got was it felt very automated, which was it wanted me to itemize the offending products or books, and then also link to what work was being infringed upon. So it wanted to know you're the copyright owner of what book and what are the books that are infringing on it. And of course, if it's AI generated, well, A, it's not copyright protected in the first place. and B, it's not necessarily infringing on existing work.

It's creating new work in the style of. So when I tried to explain this, I was asked for my trademark registration numbers instead. But most authors do not trademark their name. It's a pretty expensive process. And also would only pertain very narrowly to your work. And so I couldn't satisfy that request either, but I tried to, you know, explain, look, this is false advertising. My name is being abused here.

It's trying to pass off work as mine when it's not. But, you know, I couldn't check any of the boxes for them. So they closed the case without removing the books. Let's take a quick break. Another podcast from some SNL late night comedy guide, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Jim Gaffigan to Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman, help make you funnier.

This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer, Streeter Seidel, help an acapella band with their between songs banter. There's the worst singer in the group? The worst? Yeah. Me.

Is there anything to the idea that because you're from Harvard, you only got in because your parents made a huge donation. The group. The yard birds, right? That's the name. The Harvard Yardt. They're open to change. Do you have a name suggestion?

We're open. Since you guys are middle. A one erection. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and Friends on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Humor me. I need some jokes to make me seem funny. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ads supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora.

And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as the next two. combined. So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only IHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business. Think IHeart. Streaming, radio, and podcasting. Let us show you at IHeartadvertising.com. That's iHeartadvertising.com. What's up, fam? It's Isaiah Thomas. And I'm C.J. Toledano, and our podcast Point Game is about defying the odds. Like LeBron heading into the playoffs without Luca and Austin Reed. And finding ways to win no matter what. He's the smartest player to ever play the game.

His IQ is at a level that we've never seen before. And he knows. Without Luca and Austin Reeves, I got to manipulate the game. We get a player's perspective on the challenges of the playoffs. I think Joker's going to be exhausted this series because when they don't have Rudy in the lineup, he has to really guard guys like Nas Reid. He has to guard Julius Randall.

And then he has to give us everything he gives us on the night-to-night basis on offense. And when IT's friends stop by, like Quentin Richardson, we dive into some playoff history too. Steve Nash will get that thing. That man, hell get the flying. He running up the court, licking his fingers while he got the ball, like, after you go through a training camp with that, Isaad,

you figure it out real quick. Get your ass up and down the court, and you're going to get the ball. So listen to Point Game on the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. At our back. Amazon made Jane jump through a lot of hoops to deal with this issue.

after she couldn't produce a trademark for her own name, who could, or the copyright for the sham books on Amazon. Amazon closed the case and said they would not be removing the books. But Jane kept at it. She tweeted, and she published a piece on her own website called, I would rather see my books get pirated than this, or why Goodreads and Amazon are becoming dumpster fires.

And eventually, after lots and lots of back and forth and raising hell on social media, Amazon did remove the books, But still, Amazon is creating a system that forces individuals to have to do an incredible amount of labor just to protect their names and reputations online. And it shouldn't be the job of writers like Jane to keep Amazon's platforms authentic and accurate. And it seems like the only reason that it worked out in Jane's case is because she already has a well-respected platform. But what about authors who don't? As she writes in her piece, I'm sure that's in no small part due to my visibility and reputation in the writing and publishing community.

what will authors what smaller profiles do when this happens to them? So first of all, it just seems like so much work on your behalf to have to do to like prove that this is going on. And then also just the idea, like you said, not many people out there trademark their name. And so it's just an incredible burden on the harmed, impacted party. Meanwhile, Amazon is just like, okay, well, can you prove your case to us? It doesn't seem like the right dynamic to me. Yeah, I mean, at minimum, I think they have to implement probably a new process or procedure for this sort of complaint because it just doesn't fall along the same lines as a traditional copyright or infringement claim. So I know that eventually, luckily, probably because of your platform on social media and like being a loud, respected voice in the space, Amazon did do, I was going to say the right thing, but I guess really more the reasonable thing.

and remove these titles from your Goodreads page. But I guess my question is, what about writers who maybe don't have the time, the resources, the platform, the energy to go through this incredibly laborious process just to have your Amazon Goodreads page be accurate? Is it creating this system where it's this incredible burden on them and they maybe wouldn't be able to have success at doing this?

Yeah, I think this is the big, big, big, big problem that we're now facing because anyone with a name that carries value, if it's a name that can be profited on, which describes a lot of authors who depend on their writing for a living, you're now in this position of having to police use of that name on two sites that do a terrible job of policing or verifying author identities and pretty much have a policy of anything goes, as long as it's not blatantly illegal. So I don't know how that system can stand moving forward, which is why I made such a big stink. That said, I do think authors have remedies that are maybe less laborious when they find infringement.

So, for example, if you have a traditional publisher, I would certainly be calling them if you have, like if you still have a relationship with them, if you have a point of contact, they need to know. If that's not possible, then hopefully you belong to a writer's organization. The Authors Guild here is particularly helpful, and they did see what was happening with my case and were assisting in the background. So they're very effective at getting really clear problem material taken down. It might not happen overnight, but I would say it would happen in a few days if it's a clear case. So those are some remedies. But as far as having to police your profiles and all of that, I don't know what to say.

other than I think there are some tools out there that will alert you maybe via email that, oh, this page has seen an update or a change. So at least you get some sort of automated notification, but at least on Amazon.com, you know, you can't set up an alert that way, but maybe a Google alert or other things that would help. Yeah, so that you don't have to be visiting these sites every day. I mean, I do think we're in this weird space now where technology is really progressed at this fast speed, faster than folks can make new rules for or like anticipate. And now we're all just stuck with this internet where the bottom line like default assumption is that it's going to be full of scams and fraud and people misusing your name for their own profit. I just feel like we deserve better.

Writers deserve better. We deserve an internet landscape that is not trying to screw you at every turn. Yeah, I agree. And there are certain companies that I think have the ability and the resources to be helpful. So Amazon being a case in point, they sit at a very important waypoint for all sorts of activity that's both good and bad. And they could do so much better. they could take more responsibility. I think they have a duty of care. Why they don't, you know, wake up to that. It's hard for me to say other than capitalism. But I think they're one of quite a

number of companies that I hope that can be pressured to do better. Yeah. And something about Amazon is because they're such a big player in the space, you know, so goes Amazon, so goes the rest. And so they really, when a big platform takes a step to make their platform safer or better, a lot of other smaller platforms get in line because they really set the tone. And so if Amazon is not setting that tone, they really have this opportunity to be a leader and a good actor and a force for good of the internet, but they're just not doing it. Yeah, I couldn't agree more. And I really wish I understood the motivations or lack of motivation as the case might be. Because it certainly doesn't lead to a good customer experience, which they're supposedly concerned about,

you know, if people can't trust what they find there. What made you suspect that those books were written by AI? I think like many writers, I've done my own little experiments with chat GPT in particular, and I've used all sorts of vanity prompts because I'm curious what it's capable of, and I know for sure that these models have scraped years of my writing off of my blog. And so, you know, I'll input something like, how do I get a book published or what does Jane Friedman say about how to get a book published or who is Jane Friedman? And so I've seen the sorts of material it's capable of generating, especially in my category. And, you know, it's very surface level.

It's not, it has some substance, but if you try to push it, it starts to repeat itself or it gets more and more generic. So when I saw the opening pages of these fraudulent books and I read the bio, especially reading the bio, I could tell. I'm pretty sure this has been AI generated. You know, it's just kind of like bloviating student padded essay material. It's not, you know, it's not someone writing down and actually trying to present a cogent, you know, instruction guide. Yeah, it's so, I mean, I've certainly done what you've just described of, like, like, what can you tell me about Bridget Todd as a podcaster? And it's exactly that.

I mean, everybody's done it. But it's one of those things where, like, you know when something was written by a human, even written badly by a human. Yeah. And when something was written by AI, you can just tell. Yeah. Yeah. It may not always be that way, but at least today, it's painfully obvious.

More after a quick break. Another podcast from some SNL, late-night comedy guy, Not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Jim Gaffigan to Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and headwriter Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. There's the worst singer in the group.

The worst? Yeah. Me. Is there anything to the idea that because you're from Harvard, uh, you only got in because your parents made a huge donation. The yard birds, right? That's the name. The Harvard Yard, but they're open to change.

Do you have a name suggestion? We're open. Since you guys are middle-aged, one erection. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and Friends on the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Humor me. I need some jokes to make me seem funny. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ads supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora.

And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as the next two combined. So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only IHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business. Think IHeart. Streaming, radio, and podcasting. Let us show you at IHeartadvertising.com. That's iHeartadvertising.com.

What's up, fam? This Isaiah Thomas. And I'm C.J. Toledano. our podcast point game is about defying the odds. Like LeBron heading into the playoffs without Luca and Austin Reed. And finding ways to win no matter what. He's the smartest player to ever play the game. His IQ is at a level that we've never seen before.

And he knows without Luca and Austin Reeves, I got to manipulate the game. We get a player's perspective on the challenges of the playoffs. I think Joker's going to be exhausted this series because when they don't have Rudy in the lineup, he has to really guard guys like Nas Reid. He has to guard Julius Randall. And then he has to give us everything he gives us on the night-to-night bases on offense.

And when IT's friends stop by, like Quentin Richardson, we dive into some playoff history too. Steve Nass would get that thing. That man, hell get to flyin. He running up the court licking his fingers while he got the ball. Like, after you go through a training camp with that, Isaiah, you figure it out real quick. Get your ass up and down the court, and you're going to get the ball. So listen to Point Game on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you. you get your podcasts. Let's get right back into it. Jane's situation is just another example of the,

let's say, complicated relationship that Amazon has with the publishing industry. Back in 2021, three of the biggest names in publishing, the Association of American Publishers, the Authors Guild, and the American Booksellers Association sent a joint letter to U.S. lawmakers decrying Amazon's dominance over publishing and warning that it's threatening the entire industry. Amazon no longer competes on a level playing field when it comes to book distribution, but rather owns and manipulates the playing field, leveraging practices across its platform that appear to be well outside a fair and transparent competition. The letter reads.

And now, in light of Jane's situation, it seems like Amazon could be doing a lot to make it easier for authors to resolve issues that arise from technology like AI. But they're not. In response to Jane's situation, an Amazon spokesperson said, we invest heavily to provide a trustworthy shopping experience and protect customers and authors from misuse of our services. But currently, Amazon doesn't really have any kind of plan

to prevent scam books from proliferating on their platform, which is a real problem. How can Amazon say that they're interested in providing a trustworthy experience if they aren't doing anything to ensure that and instead are just moving that burden onto authors like Jane? What's the relationship between Amazon and the publishing industry right now? Oh, that's a big question. So it's always been a frenemy situation. Publishers have generally not been that thrilled with Amazon's dominance. And I would say, unfortunately, it's about, I want to say around 60% of books now, regardless of format are now sold through Amazon. So despite them not always, you know, being on the same side of Amazon in terms of their practices, they also can't necessarily afford to piss off Amazon either.

So it's just a very, it's a very tortured relationship. With the self-published author community, that's yet another side of the story where initially self-published authors kind of saw Amazon as a savior figure might be going a little far, but finally opening up paths to a sustainable career without having to rely on the gatekeepers of traditional publishing. And so many fabulous author careers have been launched because of Amazon services.

And they do provide something that's super valuable. However, as time has gone on, I think everyone's realizing the devil's bargain that's been struck here. And how Amazon at any time can change the rules, depress earnings, make it so you have to advertise in order to get your books noticed at all. So I think everyone at this point today is looking to not have all of their eggs in the Amazon basket and try to strengthen their careers so that if Amazon does change something in a dramatic way that makes people unhappy, they still have a career.

That is something I always tell folks about navigating this weird tech time of ours is like, do not put all of your eggs in one digital basket because you never know what might change. Bezos could wake up tomorrow and be like, now it's this. It's been that, but now it's this. And your whole thing could be threatened. So really spread things around. Have your own platforms that you own that you can say, you know, you'll be able to invest in if something changes. But it just, I think that's good advice. But it makes me sad that that's advice that folks like you have to give creatives. Yes, yes, it's become more and more essential over time. And, you know, if anyone doesn't grasp it, just looking at what's happened with Twitter, it's like, you know, Exhibit A for what happens if you rely too much on a single platform. So, yeah, I want to say that from the beginning, I've always been about diversifying. But I think today people are really listening to that message. What do you think is at stake if Amazon just continues to kind of not hold up their end of the bargain on responsibility for keeping platforms accurate, you know, with accurate information and accurate titles and stuff on there? Like, what's at stake for the industry?

Well, fortunately, I think there are chinks in Amazon's armor. I do think I've noticed a definite tide change in how people think about Amazon and shopping at Amazon. I'm looking at this from the consumer side first, but I have seen so many people shift their purchasing habits to places like bookshop, which is what people call the virtuous alternative to buying from Amazon, at least on the book side. And so, you know, when I went through this myself on social media, a lot of people said,

well, that's it. I'm never buying from Amazon again. You know, these were authors. So just people, I think, you know, the final straw has occurred for a lot of people, over the last few years, and that has to hurt, I would expect, Amazon. The negative publicity they get from things happening in publishing or from their marketplace where there's a lot of knockoffs, counterfeits, I think it has an effect.

Publishing is in a fortunate position at this moment in time because they're starting to see the potential for reaching people that's more organic. That's more community-driven. That's not reliant on Amazon. And here I'm thinking of book talk. So, you know, that, of course, there are some problems associated with that as well. I would aid to see publishers now. Just lean on TikTok to solve all their problems.

But I think certainly over the last five years in particular, the biggest publishers have been more serious about establishing direct-to-consumer relationships, whether that's their email newsletters, social media, or other efforts. And certainly small and independent publishers, they actually had some of their best performance during the pandemic when people were more conscious of, why don't we buy direct from the publisher? They probably need our help. Let's support the things that we believe in. Let's support the companies that share our values. That's really good to see. And I have to say, like, I'm right there with you with the problems around book talk, but I genuinely do feel like I have never felt like I was more part of an engaged. community of like-minded readers than with book talk. Like I know it definitely has its problems, which maybe we'll do another episode on that. But, you know, I like to read thriller books. And,

you know, I have gotten connected with so many different authors and titles that I would have never found otherwise. And I don't know. I think that something about what you're saying, it feels like a double-edged sword when it comes to tech right now, that there are all these threats and scams and liabilities, but also all of these really exciting ways to use technology for readers and authors and publishers to find each other and connect in these new ways that are also kind of exciting. Yeah. I mean, despite everything that's happened to me in the last week or so, I still remain fairly optimistic. I think that despite some of these scary things that are happening, I think the ship will write itself. I don't think we're headed towards total dystopia yet. And there's the so-called creator economy.

too has opened up a lot of options for writers and all types of creative people to figure out the business model that fits them. So no one has to be reliant on Amazon or a publishing company or a TikTok. I think there are lots of ways to go about this. There's a lot of freedom. As all of this was happening to Jane, another AI firestorm was brewing. A computer scientist and computational linguist named Benji Smith was taking a lot of heat from writers on Twitter for his platform Prosecraft, a platform that he built, quote, dedicated to the linguistic analysis of literature, where basically 25,000 books were mined, maybe from pirated sources online, to train machine learning algorithms to recognize which kinds of words can be used in which kinds of

contexts. And authors were pissed. They were pissed that Benji used their books without permission or consent. Benji apologized and took the entire platform down. Jane says that it makes sense. that authors were upset, especially at a time when being in the creative fields feels so fraught and threatened. But Jane wonders if this was a distraction from some of the bigger issues in the space. I have to ask because the situation that you had with Amazon was happening against the backdrop of that prose craft mess. Like I saw that from beginning to end, and I saw all those writers rightfully being like, hey, you can't just take our books to train your AI. Like, what are you doing? What do you think that, first of all, what did you think about that as somebody who knows the space very well?

Yeah, so this is where my views tend to diverge from the average author. I tend to stay pretty calm and rational and look at, is there actual harm occurring here? And who's behind it? And what are their motivations? And how far did this reach? Because I know how writers can jump to fear. anxiety and outrage very quickly, especially right now with the whole AI situation. Everyone is just like on a knife's edge. So it took me a little while to catch up with that situation.

Because you were going through your own situation. That's right. But when I did, what I saw was a fairly benign project, like a linguistic analysis, a text and data mining thing. And yeah, sure, he scooped up a lot of books that Looks like they were from pirate sites. I don't know if he did that intentionally or if he kind of like, you know, turned the other way when that, when his crawler scooped up these books. But I don't, like, I just can't ascribe malicious intentions to this guy. And he's just a guy. Like, he's not Amazon, right?

So I think there are, like, I look at situations differently depending on who has the power. And so I saw author, I saw how authors really acted swiftly, got the, got him to take the site down. And I think the fact he took it down so quickly indicates he, what his intentions were. He didn't want to upset people. So when the whole thing came down, authors got to claim a huge victory. But what I saw was a distraction from what the real problems are. This wasn't an AI tool. I mean, I guess, sure, he could have somehow profited.

off that data set. Maybe, like, who knows if he would have, if he could have. And so maybe it was right for that to just be nipped in the bud right away. But I just think there are bigger fish to fry here. And I'm also not a fan of, like, piling on someone like that in a way that felt just maybe a little mean-spirited. And the other thing is that authors don't have the strongest grasp of copyright law, what their rights are, what others' rights might be.

And as someone who's followed a lot of legal cases surrounding copyright and fair use, especially there's a really monumental case, the Google Books scanning case that was decided some years ago. It took a long time to be decided, but Google scanned millions of books in partnership with libraries. The Authors Guild brought a lawsuit against this to prevent it, but Google ended up winning. Even though it was ingesting all of these works without compensation to the author, the use was considered transformative and permissible under the law. So the books remain scanned. You can still, you know, you can go to Google Books and get all sorts of information from that dataset. And I think that was the correct outcome. Not all

authors agree with me, but I think it was the correct outcome. So this to me, Prosecraft seemed like this text and data mining project that had pretty low potential harm. I was, like, surprised to see how big the reaction was. And some of the authors were like, you will never, like, it was a lot of big reactions. I'll just say that. Yes, big. Very big. It seemed to me the point of prose craft was to, for potential authors to be able to glean

information about books to help themselves as authors. So if I know that, like, X novel that I'm trying to write a similar novel to use his passive voice X percent of the time, I guess my question is, is that useful information for a potential author? That part of me is like, is this person taking the books and mining stuff? Totally, yes. Good, good question. But in addition to that, is this person trying to sell potential authors on something that maybe they don't really need and try to convince? them like, oh, this is going to be the magic bullet that, like, makes your writing a success and maybe kind of preying on the need that potential authors might have for a tool that they're being

told is going to be the thing that makes them successful? I'm not even sure if I'm asking that in a way that makes sense. I think I understand what you're saying. He got criticized a lot for the sort of data, the usefulness of the data that he was presenting. I mean, people were so harsh about his the passive voice, active voice thing. You know, I have a very personal reaction to that, which is I was once married to a PhD in computer science, and he approached the world in a very different way than I did. And so knowing that this guy, Benji Smith, is a computer scientist and on top of that, a linguist, like interested in linguistic analysis, to me, he was just nerding out.

you know, and yeah, it might have only been of interest to him, and that's okay. I don't necessarily think anything that he was doing was of real value to the average writer, but it was interesting to him. Okay. I think that a lot of that is easily lost in our conversations online, especially conversations of communities that don't always feel heard, right? If you're someone trying to break into publishing, I can imagine that that is a dynamic where it's easy to think. feel like your voice has just lost all the time and that you're constantly pushing up an uphill struggle. And so I wonder if that played into some of the big reactions of like, these are a

community of people who feel unheard a lot. Yes. Yes, 100%. A hundred percent. Writers feel vulnerable, like they're getting the short end of the stick, that they're under attack, that everyone's trying to take away the value that they offer the world. And so like from a psychological perspective or from the social, cultural, political moment we're in right now, I totally get it. Very predictable outcome. But I still wish that people could just take a breath and, you know, apply more critical thinking. How do you stay so grounded? Like, in a space at a time where it feels like there are technology-enabled threats to the industry. How do you stay so pragmatic, so clear-eyed, so grounded? Some of it's just probably inherent in my nature, but also having been

in the same industry now for going on almost three decades. I do feel like I've kind of seen it all. Now, there are surprises. There's no question. But I've spoken to so many writers over the years. I've spoken at so many conferences, seeing every kind of perspective and outrage. So it's, I feel like I can step back from it all and see just the patterning. It's all just patterns and a lot of things, a lot of the same dynamics just repeat themselves again and again. Yeah, I've talked to a lot of like technologists and AI.

folks, and they say most of them have said some version of what you've just said, that it actually benefits people who make AI when we sort of doom and gloom and catastrophize, that's the right word catastrophize, around things like AI, that like, that's what they want us to be saying, and that there have been hype cycles where different kinds of technology were going to change certain industries, decimate certain industries, and those things didn't always come to fruition. So recognize that pattern. And rather than that, you know, then following in that pattern again and again and again, stop and ask, like, am I actually amplifying a hype cycle that we don't actually know is going to shift this industry

the way it's telling us, the way it's telling us it will? Absolutely. There's a wonderful project. I think it started as a podcast, and it's now just a website called The Pessimists Archive, that really, I think, introduces, it really shows this concept and action over. many, many decades. And it will like dig up old articles like from 100, 200 years ago about how this or that technology is going to destroy everything that's good. And I did a little bit of my own research too, inspired by what they do to look up what were writers saying about word

processing, you know, like when it became possible for basically anyone to start writing and typing and doing their own thing or with desktop publishing. I went to the New York Times specifically to see what was the reaction. And there was one person who felt like women would no longer have jobs as a result of word processing. Because who, you know, if everyone was typing their own stuff, what would women have left to do? Jade, I have to tell you, like, this is not at all the perspective I thought you were going to have. It is so refreshing. It, like, it is just really refreshing to hear someone be like, let's not all, like, lose it.

over this just yet, you know, let's take a step back and really do some comparison about how we've talked about things before. There's so many insights from history that we can find the way that we've talked about emerging technology. And I'm just happy that someone who is such a voice in the space is doing that, as opposed to sort of jumping on the bandwagon of like completely catastrophizing online. Right. Right. Thank you. This situation, that happened this week was very unusual because prior to this, I've always been fairly artificial intelligence neutral or generative AI neutral. And I've gotten taken to task for that by people in my community. They think that I am promoting harm or a dangerous technology. And I respect

their feelings. Like I'm not going to say nothing bad is going to happen as a result. Obviously bad things are going to happen. And I had someone actually get in touch with me a second time after taking me to task when she saw the news cycle. She said, now have you changed your mind? And I said, no, no, I haven't. I'm still on the same page as before. Well, are there guardrails that you would like to see platforms like Amazon and Goodreads take to try to keep to try to keep the harm to a minimum when it comes to AI and creatives? Yes, they can do so much better. And that's really why I raise the flag.

They can do better. They must do better. And why they haven't is beyond me. I really, I'm not so cynical to say, oh, it's just about profits. I think this harms them in the long run, too. So yes. And I would like for there to be respect and transparency from all of the companies that are putting forth this technology, whether it's Open AI or Microsoft or Google, I think authors deserve

to know if their works have been used in the training of these models. I think they should have the right to opt out. I believe in moral rights for authors, and I understand why they're upset because they're not getting really access to those moral rights in this situation. So I hope to see that come to pass. I believe in more legislation around AI. I hope it doesn't take too much longer, but I don't think we should just be shutting the whole thing down. What do you think is next for the publishing industry? Well, what's so fascinating, at least for my industry perch, is watching publishers navigate this in a way that doesn't upset the author core.

So they're definitely looking at these tools as ways to be better marketers and promoters because publishing companies, marketing departments are desperately understand. they have so little money and resource to promote the books they publish. So I think they're looking at AI as a way to immediately address that situation. And Penguin Random House, the biggest of the publishers, already has an AI person on staff, someone who's like a computer scientist type, who's looking at how to use this in a responsible way. And Penguin Random House is also setting up their own internal models.

You know, so they're not feeding the general models. But, you know, authors are starting to ask for contractual protections. You know, they're asking publishers, I want you to promise you're not going to train my work on AI. I want you to make these other promises too. Some publishers have been very willing to put that kind of language in the contract and others aren't. So I am a little bit worried that, you know, the biggest five publishers in the United States have kind of worked authors into a corner on other issues. Like, it's really hard to sell a book today without also selling the e-book rights and the audiobook rights. It's kind of, it's an all-or-nothing sort of situation.

Same with e-book royalties. You can't really negotiate those, even with a great literary agent. So I'm really concerned that if all of these big publishers kind of, they're not supposed to collude, of course, but if they somehow were to unilaterally come to the same conclusion, I would feel bad. I don't think it would be right for authors to feel like they have to give up certain rights in order to have a decent publisher if that's what they want. Well, that's a great segue to one of my last questions, which is that you've been giving advice to generations of writers.

Where can folks find your advice? Where can folks connect with you? What's next for Jane? Yeah, the best place is my author website. That's janefredman.com. I do have a range of newsletter. both free and paid that people can subscribe to and then a blog which can be delivered via email as well. So those are the best places to start.

Is there anything that I did not ask that you want to make sure it gets included in this conversation? I don't think so. That was really thorough and great questions too. Thank you. Except for the first one where I got you confused with another Jane Friedman. Well, what's it like having like another prominent person in the space with your same name and then be trying to fight with Amazon about having, like it's just a head fuck a little bit. It is. It is. I get the other Jane's emails frequently, actually. When I was interviewed by the BBC a few days ago, they introduced me as the CEO of Harper College. And I have to wonder, like, on her end, I've actually met her and I've interviewed her and it was delightful. I have to wonder on her end if she finds it as humorous

as I do, or if she's just supremely annoyed. Well, I'll have to get her on and then give her your bio. Yes. Got a story about an interesting thing in tech or just want to say hi? You can reach us at hello at tangoody.com. You can also find transcripts for today's episode at tangoody.com. There are no girls on the internet was created by me, Bridget Todd. It's a production of IHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative.

Jonathan Strickland is our executive producer. Tari Harrison is our producer and sound engineer. Michael Amato is our contributing producer. I'm your host, Bridget Todd. If you want to help us grow, rate and review us on Apple Podcasts. For more podcasts from IHeartRadio, check out the IHeart Radio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Another podcast from some SNL late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer Streeter Seidel

help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, I'm Deanna Maria Riva, and on my new podcast, How Hard Can It Be? I call on my Gen X squad from Ohio to Hollywood as we navigate Midlife's most fantastic BS.

Unfiltered conversations from night sweats to futas to scheduling sacks. Wait, what sex? Is it just me? Or does every woman my age want to look at Pinterest instead of having sex sometimes? They say we can't polish a turd, but we're sure going to try. So let's get blunt with laughs, tears, or tears of laughter. Listen to How Hard Can It Be with Diana Maria Riva on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Will Ferrell's Big Money Players and IHart Podcasts presents soccer moms.

So I'm Leanne. Yeah. This is my best friend, Janet. Hey. And we have been joined at the Hips since high school. Absolutely. A redacted amount of years later, we're still joined at the hip. Just a little bit bigger hips.

This is a podcast. We're recording it as we tailgate our youth soccer games in the back of my Honda Odyssey. With all the snacks and drinks. Why did you get hard seltzer instead of beer? Oh, they had a bogo. Well, then you got it. Listen to soccer moms on the Iheart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an IHeart podcast.

Guaranteed human.