The morality of using AI to write an article that you then sell as your own work depends on several factors, including transparency, context, intent, and any agreements or expectations involved. Here are the key ethical considerations:
1. Disclosure and Transparency
-
Ethically Questionable: Claiming full authorship of something entirely written by AI without disclosing its role may be considered dishonest, especially if others (editors, clients, readers) expect human authorship.
-
More Acceptable: If the use of AI is disclosed—either explicitly or implicitly (e.g., in a terms-of-service agreement or contributor note)—the ethical concerns are reduced.
2. Contractual and Legal Obligations
-
If you're writing under contract or for a platform that expects original human-created work, using AI without disclosure may violate terms and be both unethical and legally problematic.
-
Some publications, especially in journalism or academia, have strict rules about ghostwriting or non-human authorship.
3. Creative Integrity and Professional Identity
-
Selling AI-generated work as your own might undermine your credibility if discovered—especially in fields where creativity, voice, and critical thinking are core values.
-
If you're marketing yourself as a writer but letting AI do all the writing, there's a mismatch between claim and reality.
4. Value Provided
-
If you significantly revise, guide, or curate the AI’s output (e.g., prompt engineering, structural editing, style tuning), you're still applying your skill and judgment—this is often viewed as collaboration rather than deception.
-
If you're simply passing along raw AI content, it's harder to justify claiming authorship, particularly in moral or professional terms.
Summary:
Using AI to help write or co-write is increasingly common and can be ethically sound if you:
-
Add your own input or editing;
-
Are honest when required by contract or context;
-
Don't mislead others about the nature of the work.
However, presenting entirely AI-generated content as your own original human creation, especially for profit, without any disclosure, is ethically shaky—more so in contexts where human authorship is assumed or valued.
(No disclaimer because it's in the post that I used chatGPT.)











