AI promises to free editors from repetitive work. But what if those tasks also teach editors how to judge? Imagine two junior editors beginning their careers at university presses. One reads incoming manuscripts, checks references, identifies weaknesses in arguments, and discusses difficult submissions with senior colleagues. Much of the work is repetitive, occasionally frustrating, and … Read more
Readers are beginning to describe the books they want instead of searching for them. That small behavioral shift could have big consequences for publishers. Finding a book used to involve quite a lot of wandering around the internet. Imagine you are looking for a novel to take on holiday. You might search Google for “best … Read more
Imagine putting on a pair of headphones and listening to an audiobook. The narrator pauses naturally at the end of a sentence. A character enters the scene and the voice changes. There is a slight breath between two lines. The pacing feels right. Nothing sounds obviously artificial. Then someone tells you the narrator is not … Read more
Imagine a university library deciding whether to support an open-access journal. Every article will be freely available online, whether that library contributes or not. Its researchers will still be able to read the journal. Its students will still benefit. Meanwhile, the library’s budget is already under pressure. Why should it pay? That question sits at … Read more
Imagine submitting the manuscript you have spent years writing, only to be told that a piece of software considers it “96% AI-generated.” What happens next? A detector score may create suspicion, but it does not prove who wrote the book. It cannot see your early notes, abandoned chapters, editorial conversations, or the hundreds of decisions … Read more