U.S. Magazine Current Affairs Says No to AI-Generated Articles and Illustrations
A new collective bargaining agreement enshrines the principle that humans write the words and draw the pictures. Some AI uses that assist a human worker, such as research or color adjustment, are still permitted.
The American magazine Current Affairs has decided not to publish AI-generated articles or illustrations in its pages. On October 15, the editor in chief posted an explanation announcing the policy, which is contained in a new collective bargaining agreement. The magazine and its union described the move as a way to preserve a production process in which people write the words and draw the pictures, and to protect the workers who do that labor.
What exactly is banned
The ban covers AI-generated writing and illustration that appears in the magazine. Who makes the articles readers read and the images they see on the page is the heart of the rule. Writers and illustrators who contribute to the magazine cannot have AI-generated work published in it.
By contrast, some uses of AI tools to assist a human worker in the course of the work are permitted. Looking up source material, or touching up the color and texture of an image, falls into that category. The dividing line is whether AI produced the final piece itself or merely helped along the way.
Is this just the editor’s own rule?
The policy is grounded in an agreement between the magazine and its workers. The staff union concluded bargaining in September and announced on October 2 that it had ratified and signed a collective agreement covering the next 2 years. The editor in chief’s explanation of the AI provisions came afterward.
Current Affairs already published a print magazine and paid its writers and illustrators before this. The announcement codifies that approach into an explicit rule about generative AI. What has changed is that the commitment to keeping writing and illustration in human hands is now written into the contract.
The stated purpose, for both the magazine and the union, is protecting workers. The explanation is that the publication has set the limits of acceptable AI use while maintaining a production structure that pays writers and illustrators. The editor in chief also pointed to AI use at other outlets and its effects on employment.
What changes for readers
Subscribers can now count on an editorial principle that the magazine’s articles and illustrations are made by people. The magazine’s official information notes that it ships print copies to overseas readers as well.
What stands out about this agreement is that it separates the question of publishing AI-generated output from the question of using AI as an aid to the work. The open question is how the boundaries of permitted uses, such as research or image retouching, will hold up in day-to-day production. The test will be how the goal of protecting human creativity and labor shows up in the review of submissions and the making of each issue.