Can AI Replace Writers and Editors? A Sarcastic Memoir of Being “Replaced”

The verdict came down: AI can replace writers and editors. Mine, specifically. No dramatic email subject lines—just a tidy decision and a wave toward the exit.

The plan was simple: let the prediction machine handle empathy, nuance, and narrative.

What could go wrong? Spoiler: plenty.

If the bots had it handled, you wouldn’t be here, and I wouldn’t be laughing while typing this.

I, for One, Welcome New Robotic Word‑Bots

Generative AI, as the hype goes, can produce outlines, headlines, and draft articles at lightning speed. Managers love that. After all, why pay a human for “mundane tasks like proofreading,” when a machine will do it?

It wasn’t a walk of shame; it was a cheerful “quick sync.”  Translation: the prediction engine will now brainstorm, draft, and polish.

Funny thing: the brief still insisted on premium, voice-driven pieces readers would trust and share. Meanwhile, Forbes—their own exhibit A—points out that AI writing tends to be cookie-cutter and sometimes just wrong. But hey, budgets love buzzwords.

Once outside the building, I discovered I was not alone. A Brookings study found that freelancers in AI‑exposed occupations such as copyediting and proofreading experienced a 2% decline in new contracts and a 5% drop in earnings after AI tools hit the market.

Congratulations, I thought—I’m part of a statistic.

Editor's earnings declined.

Even more ironic: these declines were especially pronounced among experienced freelancers offering higher‑quality services.

My years of expertise? Quantified and dismissed.

Writers by Purpose, Robots by Prompt

If you want to appreciate the absurdity of being replaced by an algorithm, recall that human writers compose with intention and meaning. We invent metaphors to convey emotion and choose words to echo the writer’s voice.

AI, on the other hand, receives a prompt and blindly predicts the next token. When my replacement tried to craft a heartfelt personal essay, it produced a lifeless list of clichés.

Purpose matters: as one open letter noted, AI does not intend to stir emotions or convey truth. It cannot experience the process of writing—learning from mistakes, changing perspectives, and discovering new ways to express oneself. Yet for some reason, my employer believed that the machine could replicate me easily.

“Editing” by Erasing Voices

Editing requires empathy and cultural awareness. A human editor reads between the lines, understands what an author is trying to say, and offers guidance that preserves their voice.

After my departure, AI took over the editing department. Predictably, it began rewriting manuscripts, deleting sentences, and inserting synonyms that changed the meaning. The Science Editor journal had warned about these exact issues: AI tends to distort meaning and ignore context.

My former colleagues spent hours post‑editing the AI’s output—so much for efficiency! Meanwhile, I sipped coffee and updated my résumé.

But What About Those Shiny Statistics?

Not all the numbers are doom and gloom. The PwC Global AI Jobs Barometer shows that AI‑exposed industries have experienced threefold higher productivity growth and a 56% wage premium for AI‑skilled workers.

Higher productivity, higher wages with AI.

Roles considered highly automatable even grew 38% between 2019 and 2024. Where was my 56% wage premium? Probably lost somewhere between the boardroom and the IT department. Despite these rosy numbers, the same report emphasises that AI complements human work, allowing employees to focus on higher‑level responsibilities. If only my company had read that line.

The Aftermath: You Can’t Replace Intent with Code

Give it a few months, and it’s not hard to imagine the AI struggling with personal essays or nuanced edits. Customers might say the content feels bland and generic, missing the human voice that draws readers in. Manuscripts could come back a little incoherent, because a model can’t always carry a narrative arc.

Managers might even circle back to “consult.” If that happens, I’d point them to the research they skipped: generative models often fall short on complex characters and universal human experiences. An editor advocates for both author and reader—AI doesn’t have that empathy. As Hazel Bird and others have noted, editors may well remain a bulwark against AI’s cultural downsides.

Sarcasm Aside, Collaboration Is the Future of Editors and Writers

So, did AI replace me? Technically, yes: I was fired. Practically? Absolutely not. AI can summarise research, clean up grammar, and suggest edits at scale. But it cannot replicate the intention, empathy, cultural knowledge, judgment, and human connection that are the hallmarks of great writing and editing.

 The statistics show that the market is shifting, but not in the way sensational headlines suggest. Routine tasks may be automated, but the core value of storytelling and editing remains human. Companies that use AI as a tool rather than a replacement will thrive.

As for me? I now freelance, combining AI tools with my own skillset—and I charge extra when clients ask for “AI‑proof” quality. Irony tastes sweet.

Sources:

“Will AI Replace Writers? Here’s Why It’s Not Happening Anytime Soon.” Forbes, 3 Mar. 2025, https://www.forbes.com/sites/allbusiness/2025/03/03/will-ai-replace-writers-heres-why-its-not-happening-anytime-soon/.

Newland, Tahlia. “Will AI Replace Writers, Editors & Cover Designers?” Alkira Publishing, 19 Aug. 2024, https://alkirapublishing.com/will-ai-replace-writers-editors-and-cover-designers/.

“Editors and AI, Part V: Will AI Replace Human Editors?” Inkbot Editing, n.d., https://www.inkbotediting.com/blog/editors-and-ai-part-v-will-ai-replace-editors/.

Baron, Rachel. “AI Editing: Are We There Yet?” Science Editor, vol. 47, 2024, pp. 78–82. Council of Science Editors, 19 Aug. 2024, https://doi.org/10.36591/SE-4703-18.

Hui, Xiang, and Oren Reshef. “Is Generative AI a Job Killer? Evidence from the Freelance Market.” Brookings Institution, 8 July 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/is-generative-ai-a-job-killer-evidence-from-the-freelance-market/.

PwC. “AI Linked to a Fourfold Increase in Productivity Growth and 56% Wage Premium, while Jobs Grow Even in the Most Easily Automated Roles.” PwC Newsroom, 3 June 2025, https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/news-room/press-releases/2025/ai-linked-to-a-fourfold-increase-in-productivity-growth.html.