AI will, inevitably, raise the value of writers

People put little effort into writing anymore. And why would they? Writing, once a laborious process, has become remarkably easy. Give AI a few basic instructions, and it can draft an email, polish an article, write a caption, or structure an essay within seconds.

The convenience is undeniable. But there is a paradox here: the easier writing becomes, the more valuable human-written articles may become.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Think about how people wrote centuries ago. Educated people had to write constantly, even if simply to communicate with friends, family, colleagues, and acquaintances. And these were not WhatsApp messages or two-line texts. A letter could easily run to several pages.

Even people who never considered themselves writers were, therefore, practising the craft regularly. They had to organise their thoughts, explain themselves, describe experiences, and express their emotions in words. Over time, they naturally became better at it.

Today, we are losing that habit.

People use AI even for the smallest acts of expression: a birthday wish, a condolence note, or a few words accompanying a photograph with someone they love.

But writing is not merely a way of communicating what we already think. Writing is also one of the ways we learn to think.

When we struggle to explain an idea, we are forced to understand it. When we search for the right word, we refine our thought. When we write something badly and rewrite it, we develop judgement. The difficulty is part of the process.

If we outsource that process completely, we may eventually lose more than our ability to write. We may lose our ability to think independently and articulate what is actually going on inside our heads.

And that is where I see an interesting future for writing.

As AI-generated text becomes ubiquitous, polished writing will become abundant. There will be no shortage of grammatically flawless articles, perfectly structured essays, and smoothly worded social-media posts.

What will become scarce is original thought.

There is a difference between writing that is technically good and writing that has something genuinely worth saying. AI can help with the first. The second still depends on a human being who has observed, experienced, and questioned something or connected ideas in a novel way.

If machines can produce polished prose instantly, being able to produce polished prose will no longer be a particularly rare skill.

Think about it this way: who gives you credit for pressing a button on a remote control to turn on the air conditioner or change the television channel? Nobody. The action is too effortless to be considered an achievement.

AI-generated writing could eventually be viewed in much the same way. When everyone can produce a polished article, essay, script, or caption within seconds, simply producing those words will no longer be impressive. A byline means little if the person behind it has contributed neither an original idea nor a distinctive voice.

What will matter is the person behind the prose: the journalist who notices what others missed, the essayist with an unusual argument, the novelist with a distinct voice, the screenwriter who sees a story differently.

And this may finally change how society values writers. Those with genuinely original voices across creative fields may begin to receive the recognition, respect, and reward their work deserves, precisely because their ability will have become rarer.

That is why aspiring writers should refrain from falling into the temporary convenience trap.

Why spend an hour struggling with a paragraph when AI can give you ten versions in seconds? Why sit with a blank page when a machine can tell you what to say?

Because the struggle is the training.

Every time you force yourself to find the right expression, you exercise your mind. Every time you reject a sentence and try again, you develop judgement.

I say this as someone who works in writing.

I use AI too. I use it all the time. I need references, information, and sometimes help processing large amounts of material. But I also try to think through and write an idea myself before bringing AI into the process.

At the same time, I have been trying to read more. Whenever I have time, I read news reports, Facebook posts, Messenger group chats, essays, long-form journalism and, of course, books. I also watch news packages, documentaries, and films while listening to audiobooks and podcasts.

All of these keep the brain active. They expose us to different ways of thinking, give us new material to work with and help us make connections that might otherwise never occur to us.

For me, that is the balance we need in the age of AI: use the machine, but do not surrender the mind.

Read. Listen. Watch. Think. Write. Not always in this order, but in whichever order works for you. Then use technology – not to replace the thinking that makes the work worth reading, but to make the work better.