Winner of the Prix Goncourt literary prize admits to using AI; The Guardian, November 5, 2026

Emma Loffhagen, The Guardian; Winner of the Prix Goncourt literary prize admits to using AI

"The winner of France’s most prestigious literary prize has admitted using artificial intelligence while writing his novel, barely a day after collecting an award whose jury had thrown out another book over suspected AI use.

Philippe Jaenada, who won the Prix Goncourt on Tuesday for L’Inconnue du quai de Javel (The Unknown Woman of the Quai de Javel), told France Inter radio on Wednesday that he had turned to AI “three times” while writing it.

The first, he said, was to slip in a sentence written by ChatGPT in order to “play with the reader”. He said he had revealed which sentence it was only to the Goncourt jurors, on the day of the award. “If it gets out, I’ll know where it came from,” he said.

He also included a section of AI-generated text to poke fun at ChatGPT, which gave “completely absurd answers about a technical detail”, and for research...

The admission comes after the Académie Goncourt removed Thélyson Orélien’s book C’était ça ou Mourir (It Was That or Die) from its longlist in September. The Canadian-Haitian writer’s debut had been the breakout hit of France’s rentrée littéraire – the period between late August and early November which sees many books published in France – selling more than 35,000 copies and winning the Prix du roman Fnac (Fnac novel prize), before the journalist Samuel Fitoussi ran it through the AI-detection tool Pangram and concluded that much of it had been machine-generated. However, the accuracy of AI-detection software has been called into question.

In a statement on 25 September, the academy said analyses by researchers and journalists showed the novel was “in all likelihood very largely the product of an artificial intelligence”. It said it wanted to protect the integrity of a prize that exists to honour “literature written by women and men”, and to send “a clear message” that it did not endorse texts generated with the help of AI...

The contrast has prompted some accusations of a racial double standard online. “So when it’s an old white man it’s fine, but when it’s a young writer of colour he gets stoned in the public square?” one user wrote on X. Another said Jaenada had faced “no media lynching, no banishment” over his use of AI – “a leniency denied to Thélyson Orélien”."

skip past newsletter promotio

Dartmouth Provost Resigns Over AI Use; Inside Higher Ed, October 28, 2026

Kenneth C. Zirkel and Eudoro Lopez/Wikimedia Commons , Inside Higher Ed; Dartmouth Provost Resigns Over AI Use

A review committee used Santiago Schnell’s available chat logs to help determine that he overused artificial intelligence to help write published articles and wasn’t forthcoming about it.

"Dartmouth College Provost Santiago Schnell resigned Wednesday after a faculty-led review committee concluded that he “used AI to meaningfully alter his writing” and “fell short” of the university’s academic integrity standards. "

Publisher cuts ties with Quebec author accused of AI use in award-winning novel; CBC, October 21, 2026

 Annabelle Olivier , CBC; Publisher cuts ties with Quebec author accused of AI use in award-winning novel

Thélyson Orélien had denied AI use, admitted to past plagiarism

"Montreal publishing house Éditions du Boréal announced Wednesday it is ending its professional relationship with Thélyson Orélien — a Haitian-born, Quebec-based author. 

In a news release, the publisher said new information, confirmed over the course of recent days, indicates that artificial intelligence was used in the writing process of Orélien's novel, C’était ça ou mourir, published earlier this year."

A Turning Point in AI Writing; The Atlantic, August 27, 2026

 Will Oremus , The Atlantic; A Turning Point in AI Writing

The Wall Street Journal is defending an op-ed written by a chatbot.

"Yes, many transformative technologies have overcome opposition on their way to broad acceptance, but that doesn’t mean the resistance is a waste of time. It’s part of how society hashes out norms, sets limits, and buys time to adapt. Publishing AI writing under a human byline without telling anyone seems more likely to erode people’s trust in the technology than build it.

There’s another reason to keep up the norm of disclosure: When people let a chatbot do their writing—even if they’re guiding and carefully reviewing its work—they might not realize that it’s doing some of their thinking too...

Maybe Druckenmiller owning his AI use and receiving the Journal’s blessing heralds a new era of guilt-free mechanized writing. Or maybe it’s just another example of the rich and powerful getting away with something that others can’t. Gigot’s defense of Druckenmiller suggested that his reputation and stature obviated concerns about his use of AI. “His contribution to the public debate was still valuable, and he’s welcome in our pages any time,” Gigot wrote. In contrast, when a previously obscure writer, Mia Ballard, was accused of using AI in her horror novel Shy Girl, her publisher launched an investigation, canceled the book, and left her reputation in shreds."

Billionaire Admits Wall Street Journal Op-Ed Was Written Using AI: ‘I’m Not Embarrassed’; TheWrap, August 25, 2026

Alex Welch , TheWrap; Billionaire Admits Wall Street Journal Op-Ed Was Written Using AI: ‘I’m Not Embarrassed

"Billionaire hedge fund manager Stanley Druckenmiller has confirmed that his opinion essay published Monday by The Wall Street Journal was written using artificial intelligence.

The essay in question, “Let the Bond Market Speak,” questions U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s interventionist methods to manage U.S. treasury yields. After it was published, AI detection tool Pangram concluded that the op-ed had been penned using AI. When asked about those reports Tuesday by NOTUS, Druckenmiller said, “Of course I used AI.”...

Druckenmiller’s comments come at a time when the use of AI remains a hot topic of ethical and journalistic debate online."

I’m Begging You: Never Write With A.I.; The New York Times, August 4, 2026

 BRET STEPHENS, The New York Times; I’m Begging You: Never Write With A.I.

"This column isn’t so much an argument as it is a plea: Don’t use artificial intelligence to help you write. Never let A.I. do your writing for you.

Don’t use it for school papers, work briefs, letters to your in-laws, speeches at your company gathering or emails (however perfunctory) to your colleagues or friends. Don’t let it organize your notes. Don’t let it suggest an opening sentence, a segue or a closing paragraph. Don’t ask it to write a first draft and pretend that editing that draft somehow makes it your own. It doesn’t.

Do none of these things not because they are unethical. Writing with A.I. is unethical when it’s a deception: when you pass off words, ideas and information as your own when they aren’t. An acknowledgment can largely address the problem. Do none of these things, either, because you might be able to learn to write better than an A.I. can. Pretty soon, if not already, you won’t, just as you can’t outrun a car or outplay a chess app.

The problem with writing with A.I. is that it’s mentally enfeebling — an escalator toward a result when you really need to make a daily habit of taking the stairs. As it becomes ubiquitous, it undermines not only our individual ability to write but also a society’s collective ability to reason, a culture’s inner capacity to create and everyone’s reason to care. We’re already reckoning with the well-documented decline of reading; A.I. is accelerating the decline of writing, ushering us further into what The Atlantic’s Rose Horowitch calls our “postliterate age...

A recent examination using A.I.-detection technology of 100 doctoral dissertations found that 56 percent of them contained “more than negligible” A.I.-generated writing and 19 percent had “more than 50 percent A.I.-generated text.” Anecdotal stories from college professors have a finger-in-the-dike feeling with regard to their efforts to hold back the flood of A.I.-generated student papers. It’s easy to treat the problem as one of mere cheating. But cheating doesn’t capture the real scope of the A.I. threat, which isn’t merely to academic integrity or personal betterment but also to democratic self-governance."

$2m crime novel deal collapses amid questions over AI use; The Guardian, July 31, 2026

Emma Loffhagen, The Guardian; $2m crime novel deal collapses amid questions over AI use

"A high-profile publishing deal for a debut crime novel has collapsed after doubts emerged over whether artificial intelligence played a role in writing it."