NaNoWriMo is facing serious criticism following comments calling the condemnation of AI usage “classist” and “ableist.”
In the creative writing sphere, November is known to many as National Novel Writing Month thanks to the non-profit organization of the same name, typically shortened to the acronym NaNoWriMo. However, aspiring novelists will face a challenge even greater than writing 50,000 words in just 30 days: deciding whether or not to use a resource that has come under immense scrutiny over the last few years.
The most recent controversy surrounding NaNoWriMo came when they posted a statement explaining that “to categorically condemn AI would be to ignore classist and ableist issues surrounding the use of the technology.”
It continued by saying that the “financial ability to engage a human for feedback and review assumes a level of privilege that not all community members possess… [and that] some brains and ability levels require outside help or accommodations to achieve certain goals.”
Responses were swift and critical: writers put NaNoWriMo on blast and several board members and sponsors stepped away from the organization. Cass Morris, a fantasy writer and editor and now ex-board member, told CBC that AI would demolish the integrity of the challenge and that “it’s very, very sad that they [NaNoWriMo] are lighting themselves on fire.”
Silvia Moreno-Garcia, a past participant in the challenge and author of novels like Mexican Gothic and Gods of Jade and Shadow, posted her discontent in a series of threads on X: “It’s a ghoulish thing to see big corporations trying to suck the humanity, the journey, the personal experiences, out of everything. If you want the real benefits of NaNoWriMo, instead of destroying your soul, call a friend and make a writing day.”
The arguments from creative writers against the company mainly revolve around the opinion that generative AI is a bane to creativity, quality and humanity as a whole.
In a statement on his website, which also detailed his resignation from the NaNoWriMo board, Daniel José Older said:
“It kills jobs and it kills plants and animals. Also, it makes cursed, soulless garbage. And it steals s*** (and I mean s*** affectionately here) without permission, s*** that people worked hard on and poured their heart and soul into, and repurposes that s*** into said cursed soulless garbage.”
Older refers to the detrimental effects that artificial intelligence has on the environment as well as the serious issue of generative AI training models to generate or alter text via writing from authors who were never informed, thus stealing their intellectual and creative property.
Critics say that NaNoWriMo made the ‘pro-social justice’ comments as a veil to justify their partnership with the AI-powered writing assistant Pro Writing Aid, an argument that is exemplified by Laura Elliot, who wrote on X that “disabled writers do not need the immoral theft machine to write because we lack the ability to be creative without plagiarism — encouraging AI is a slap in the face to all writers and this excuse is appallingly ableist,” using NaNoWriMo’s own phrasing against them.
NaNoWriMo has since edited the post that garnered so much flack and released a note to the community clarifying their initial comments. In the note, the organization explains that they’d seen “vitriolic” debates on their social media channels about AI and “wanted to send a clear signal that NaNoWriMo spaces would not be used to bully or delegitimize other writers.”
Here, NaNoWriMo alludes to their latest bout of criticism regarding one of the main moderators of NaNoWriMo’s Young Writer’s Program, whom it was revealed in 2023 had been grooming children for over a year without any intervention from the company. This, combined with another controversy regarding NaNoWriMo’s partnership with Inkitt, a company of known scammers, had many authors boycotting the organization long before their comments about generative AI.
Despite trying to redeem themselves, NaNoWriMo’s recent comments have done little against the waves of criticism that continue to batter against their administration.
This November, new and young writers looking to write 50,000 words will have to decide whether to do so through this organization, fraught with controversy, or to do as Moreno-Garcia suggests and simply “call a friend.”
