Blocked and Reported – Episode 302: "It's Not Cheating. It's Leveraging Available Tools To Optimize Your Workflow."

Hosts: Katie Herzog and Jesse Singal
Date: April 6, 2026

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into recent controversies around the use of AI (artificial intelligence) in creative and journalistic work – focusing on allegations of AI-generated fiction, plagiarism in journalistic writing, and the ethical and practical dilemmas now roiling the industry. Katie and Jesse discuss a viral scam involving the novel Shy Girl, AI’s creep into Modern Love columns, and broader debates: When does “leveraging tools” cross a line? Are the new AI detectors any good? And is using AI for research moral, dangerous, or just modern workflow optimization?

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Lindy West Update & “Thin Skin” Film

• Quick aside (00:07): Katie and Jesse briefly riff on the podcast’s recurring Lindy West obsession, veering into a review of the film Thin Skin.
• Thin Skin is an autobiographical dramedy involving Lindy West’s partner, Aham, directed by Charles Mudede.
  • Katie’s verdict: It’s better than expected, “significantly better than the book,” with “funny laugh aloud lines” and vivid characters (01:18–02:24).
  • Insight: The film portrays themes of familial estrangement, ambition, and creative disappointment, notably Aham’s struggles for his musician identity to be recognized.
• Lindy West book tour: Two dates canceled (07:35), sparking speculation.

2. Main Topic Introduction: AI and Plagiarism in Writing

• Katie introduces the main theme: “...there’s been a lot of chatter over the past couple weeks about, you know, I’m not even quite sure what to call it. Is it AI plagiarism?” (08:24)
• Jesse: “If it’s passing AI’s work off as your own, that’s plagiarism.” (08:33)

3. Case Study: Shy Girl and AI-Generated Fiction Scandal

The Book and the Backlash (08:40–19:00)

• Shy Girl by Mia Ballard: Self-published, became a viral BookTok hit, then picked up by Hachette UK.
• Early red flags: Original cover art was stolen from an online artist (11:35).
• Reddit thread on “Horror Lit” raises suspicions about AI authorship; a book editor notes “ChatGPT tells” in the prose (11:53).
  • Extract from the book is read aloud (12:25), and both hosts debate: Is this just overwrought writing or generative AI?
  • Katie: “I didn’t think it was bad writing.” Jesse: “I don’t think it was particularly bad writing. Maybe a little over—yeah. But it seems like it’s going to be that kind of book.” (14:50)
• Notable Quote:
  • “It’s really hard to substantiate a claim of AI fiction writing because humans can be really bad writers.” — Frankie Shelf, YouTube book reviewer (17:40)

Detection & Fallout

• AI-detection company Pangram declares the book “78% AI,” but methods are questioned—AI detectors are fallible (18:11).
• Past interviews with Ballard show suspiciously robotic/AI phrasing (19:37); even the author photo appears AI-processed.
• When called out, Ballard says an “editor” may have run her book through an AI tool, but she denies personal responsibility (21:54, 23:26).
• Earlier suspicions: Reddit users had flagged her prior work for being AI-generated long before the scandal (25:07).
• Hachette ultimately cancels publication; Ballard says her reputation is “ruined for something I didn’t even personally do” (24:00).
  • Jesse: “You accepted [the] edits without, like, inquiring? No... that's your responsibility.” (24:32)

Defense and Debate (27:21)

• Some, like Audrey Henson (Dr. Dossier), argue that AI detection tools are racially biased and possibly unreliable.
• The hosts are skeptical: “Best possible ending... Mia Ballard is not actually black. That she’s a white man using AI images to pass herself off as black.” (27:52)
• Broader point: AI’s mimicry of bad, repetitive writing muddies the line between “AI slop” and human mediocrity.

4. Journalism Meets the Machines: NYT Modern Love & Review Plagiarism

Modern Love Column AI Assistance (30:27–33:23)

• An emotional Modern Love essay draws suspicion for “textbook ChatGPT voice.”
  • NYT freezes reviews amid AI allegations.
  • Columnist admits to using AI as “a tool”—seeking “inspiration, guidance, correction”—but claims not to have copied/pasted language.
  • Jesse: “If you can’t stay on topic within a paragraph... you’re maybe just not a professional writer.” (32:47)
  • Katie is skeptical of the author’s denials: “That reads exactly like an AI model right there.” (33:02)

NYT Book Review Plagiarism (34:24–36:51)

• UK freelancer Alec Preston caught using AI to paraphrase (and ultimately plagiarize) a passage from a Guardian review in his NYT book review.
  • Preston admits, “It was under length and I was rushing badly and drowning slightly... I made the stupid decision to use an AI tool to help expand and smooth it... It had also dropped in language from [the Guardian review].” (35:17)
  • Katie: He “certainly paid the price”—NYT cuts ties.
• Jesse: “It’s the heart of it. I'm not trying to minimize it. It's a serious lapse and deeply embarrassing... But the error was in using the tool at all and then failing to catch what it had done.” (34:24)

Slippery Slope & Ethical Lines (36:51–38:00)

• Jesse: Regular use of AI for workflow—never output, but admits the habit can be tempting and the line blurry for some.
• Both agree: Using AI to write or expand material is plagiarism; using it for basic research/fact-checking is more nuanced and may be reasonable.

5. The Matt Goodwin Book Scandal: AI for Research, or Just Shoddy Work?

Goodwin’s Book “Suicide of a Nation” (37:55–41:59)

• Matt Goodwin, right-wing UK pundit, publishes a book containing multiple wild claims—many traced back to apparent AI “hallucinations.”
  • Example: A dubious claim about classroom demographics in Bradford, presented without source (38:34).
  • Sparse footnotes—sometimes referencing his own Substack, sometimes URLs clearly linked to ChatGPT (39:41).
• Jesse: “That doesn’t mean anything... it just means you arrived there from ChatGPT.” (39:44)
• Katie argues that AI research is different from Google—easier to cherry-pick; Jesse: “But if you’re Matthew Goodwin, you’re not gonna, it doesn’t matter anyway.” (40:16)
• Goodwin’s defense: Accuses “the left” of orchestrating a smear; claims, “AI didn’t write my book” (41:01).
  • Katie: “He’s trying to position himself as the victim of an unfair cancellation campaign when really this is just lazy work.”

6. Megan McArdle and the Journalist’s AI Stack

McArdle’s Admission (42:27–46:00)

• Megan McArdle (Washington Post) admits on X/Twitter to widespread use of AI:
  • For research, formatting, interview transcription, first-draft fact-checking, generating questions (“a combination of an intern, a first pass editor, and a fact checker”) (42:27).
  • She specifies strict boundaries: “Never have it outline or write. Accept nothing at face value.” (45:20)
• Social media response: Many call for her firing, accuse her of violating Post policy, or claim she is undermining journalistic standards.
  • Jesse is exasperated: “I don’t understand what’s wrong. She’s not saying I prompted it to write for me... I don’t get this.” (43:50)
• Katie: “The thing that most critics seem particularly mad about is that Megan said she uses AI as a fact checker... it’s the first step, not the last step.” (46:22)

The Culture War over AI

• General left-vs-right moral panic over AI in newsrooms, with hostility rooted in both labor fears and technological suspicion (47:51–48:56).
  • Jesse: “People hate Megan because she’s like a libertarian... there’s this weird strain of deep moral disgust with AI mostly on the left...” (47:51)
• Katie notes that fear and moral disgust often overlap with underlying economic and status anxieties in the industry (49:10).

7. The Energy and Ethics of AI Use

• Taylor Lorenz is criticized online for using AI, with some followers alleging environmental racism based on AI data centers’ energy use (52:11).
  • Notable Quote:
    • “It is extremely confusing for you to do so much journalistic work regarding air quality... then go on to use a technology that poisons black communities with air pollution...” (52:13, attributed to a Twitter response)
  • Jesse’s reaction: “This is so dumb... Are you sure [not using AI] would use less energy?” (53:09)
• Katie: “Right now eating meat has a much higher impact on the climate and on water than AI. This could change as there’s more AI...” (57:05)
  • Both agree: The environmental argument against individual AI use is weak, often a form of moral posturing driven by cultural/tribal antagonism.

8. Hosts’ Own AI “Workflow Stacks” (58:48–62:20)

• Both Jesse and Katie use AI as a kind of “entry-level research assistant,” for:
  • Brainstorming sources, copy editing (with explicit instructions not to rewrite), generating counterarguments, basic fact-checking with requests for sources.
  • Both stress: They do not use AI to generate text for publication.
  • Jesse: “I can’t imagine using it to produce writing under my name. Like, I’m a fucking writer. I do this for a living. That’s not my work.” (61:45)
  • Katie: “That’s how I feel. It’s the ick factor. I also enjoy writing, though.” (62:05)
• Acknowledgment that many journalists are, in fact, poor writers; in the future, AI-generated reporting may become indistinguishable from human—raising difficult ethical and commercial questions (63:01–64:27).

Memorable Quotes & Moments

• On AI detection:
  “AI is trained on human writing. AI is going to pick up the idiosyncrasies of human writing.” — Katie (17:53)
• On AI repetition:
  “Sharp and jagged, sharp and terrifying, sharp and loud, sharp and quiet, sharp and grounding, sharp and unforgiving, sharp and endless, sharp and fast, sharp and electric, sharp and piercing... I could go on.” — Frankie Shelf via Katie (16:20)
• On using AI as a writing crutch:
  “If you can’t stay on topic within a paragraph... you’re maybe just not a professional writer.” — Jesse (32:47)
• On the “ick” of AI writing:
  “I can’t imagine using it to produce writing under my name... that’s not my work.” — Jesse (61:45)
• On posturing and AI:
  “This is all guided by people’s moral discussions just du jour. They’re mad about AI right now, so they try to backtrack into some, like, reason to be mad about AI.” — Jesse (57:05)
• On environmental moralism:
  “Given the sorts of people who get mad on the Internet, half of these people are literally dripping hamburger juice on their keyboard as they yell at Taylor Lorenz about using AI.” — Jesse (57:25)
• On the looming future:
  “What happens when AI novels are truly indistinguishable from human novels? ...Do I want to read AI novels or articles?... No, I don’t. But I’m not totally sure I can tell you why, other than it’s icky.” — Katie (63:34, 63:56)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:07–08:24: Lindy West, Thin Skin film, and banter
• 08:24–19:00: Introducing AI plagiarism topic; Shy Girl scandal background
• 19:44–26:40: Mia Ballard defense, Reddit investigation of prior works
• 27:21–28:51: Debates over AI detectors and racial bias
• 30:27–33:23: Modern Love AI-aided essay
• 34:24–36:51: NYT book review plagiarism, fallout
• 37:55–41:59: The Matt Goodwin UK scandal: AI in research
• 42:27–46:22: Megan McArdle’s admission of AI in workflow and reactions
• 48:56–49:38: Labor market anxieties and politics in media AI debate
• 52:11–57:05: Taylor Lorenz, climate/energy/AI moral panic
• 58:48–64:27: Katie & Jesse’s own AI workflows and future of authorship

Final Thoughts

This episode explores the rapidly shifting norms around AI and the writer’s craft—with Katie and Jesse drawing nuanced lines between leveraging tools for efficiency and surrendering creative identity. They raise key questions about authenticity, ethics, detection tech, environmental impact, and how the “ick factor”—as much as any hard rule—may determine the future of human writing and reputation.

For links to articles and additional content, visit: www.blockedandreported.org