As a competent editor, I can identify that you made use of ChatGPT based on these sentences.

I used to be the head editor of a crooked newspaper.

The truth started to emerge about the CEO's indifference to his unlawful business methods, the authors' use of ChatGPT, and the bogus product review articles shortly after I started my new work. I didn't know any of this when I accepted the position.

Big language models like ChatGPT aren't always bad, in my view. They can be a valuable tool for generating content quickly and efficiently. However, when misused or not properly disclosed, they can lead to ethical dilemmas and misrepresentation. It's important for editors to be vigilant and ensure that the content they are reviewing is authentic and original, rather than relying solely on AI-generated text. In my new role, I make sure to thoroughly check for any signs of AI-generated content to maintain the integrity of the publication.

For authors, AI has the potential to be a game-changer.

For my own writing, I utilize it to generate ideas, clarify concepts, simplify formatting, and polish my work. Additionally, it saves my sanity on those occasions when I am stuck for a term. (Hint: While writing your statement, use an underscore in the appropriate location and ask ChatGPT to fill it in.)

However, there is a significant distinction between supplementing AI with it and misusing it to produce content. Both quality and efficiency are enhanced by the former. The latter insults the intellect of your reader and causes your reputation to sink.

The writers on my recently acquired team were utilizing AI to produce complete pieces, and it was brutally evident.

Their information was repetitious, uninteresting, and badly written, not to mention factually inaccurate.

Because AI wants to answer your prompt but may not have the appropriate facts to do so, chatbots frequently create “hallucinations,” or information that’s illogical and wrong. They may grab quotations, facts, or ideas out of thin air, and unless you fact-check your work, you’ll never know it.

Misinformation was the initial warning sign, but AI-generated material also includes the same sentences again and over again. This lack of originality and coherence in AI-generated content is a clear indication of its limitations. It is essential for writers to exercise caution and discernment when using AI tools to avoid the dissemination of inaccurate or plagiarized information. As technology continues to advance, it is crucial for content creators to uphold ethical standards and ensure the integrity of their work.

These words make it exceedingly evident that you utilized ChatGPT.

“Treasure trove”

“Intricate tapestry”

“It’s important to note that”

“It’s essential to consider.”

“While navigating the complexities of”

“A testament to”

“Furthermore”

“Consequently”

“In the world of”

“Let’s delve into”

“Look no further than”

“Whether you're... or...”

“A plethora of”

“In conclusion”

What do most of these sentences have in common?

They’re low-effort transition phrases that don’t imply much of anything. They’re fluff. Placeholders. Wasted word count. Bad writing.

But why would ChatGPT vomit out awful writing if language is supposed to be its specialty?

Large language models like ChatGPT are typically trained using publicly accessible material from the internet. Yes, there is some decent writing—but for every high-quality item, you’ll discover hundreds of generic listicles, terrible blog entries, spammy pieces, keyword-stuffed rubbish, and amateur essays with no views.

In other words, ChatGPT learns how to write by examining material from inexperienced authors. This means that the model is more likely to generate content that mirrors the low-quality writing it has been exposed to during training. While it may have the ability to understand language and grammar rules, its output is limited by the quality of the data it has been fed. As a result, ChatGPT may struggle to produce compelling, original, and well-written content because it lacks exposure to high-caliber writing examples. In essence, the saying "garbage in, garbage out" rings true when it comes to the output of large language models like ChatGPT.

Real authors do utilize the aforementioned terms.

But it doesn’t imply they make for excellent writing.

In fact, if you eliminated those terms totally, most of your statements wouldn’t lose any sense. But it would result in a cleaner, more succinct, and more confident article.

Beginners feel that elaborate, wordy language attracts readers. Professionals recognize that writing is a kind of communication, and communication should be as plain as possible.

A couple of these phrases won’t make or break your work, but when most of them are present in the same piece, it informs your editor of two things: You utilized ChatGPT as a shortcut (not a springboard), and you have no interest in perfecting your skill as a writer.

As for me?

I was dismissed from that dishonest newspaper because I refused to let AI replace passionate, skilled authors, and I wear that job termination like a badge of pride. I believe that true writing should come from the heart, not a machine. While AI can be a helpful tool, it should never replace the creativity and passion that a human writer can bring to a piece. I will continue to hone my craft and strive to create meaningful content that resonates with readers on a deeper level.