Professors are tearing their hair out over AI detectors. Timothy Paustian has tried everything to stop his students from writing essays with AI. When ChatGPT first came out, Paustian, a biology professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, tested AI detectors that promised to flag machine-generated prose. They were "comically bad," he told me. Then he started sneaking invisible prompts into his assignments that only chatbots would respond to.

First, AI stole their books. Earlier this summer, Tamra Westberry received a Facebook notification that made her heart sink. A fellow author had taken to social media to endorse Westberry's latest book, Project Erebus, after reading about it in a weekly roundup of the latest paranormal-romance releases. Independent authors like Westberry, who is based in Texas and has published dozens of books under the pen name Tara West, usually welcome an encouraging word and a bit of cross-promotion. She had never heard of a book called Project Erebus .

He's wearing a beige T-shirt and has short dark hair, a boyish expression, and a wide smile. He says he's rushing home with lunch and will call back.

Users A.I. Detectors Are Supposed to Make Our Writing Better. It Might Be Doing the Opposite. If you've been avoiding the em dash and words like and, you're not alone. Enter your email to receive alerts for this author. You can manage your newsletter subscriptions at any time.

Is This What Comes After AI Slop? Set in a surveillance state ruled by a masked elite, the novel traces the unlikely romance between the president's son and an assassin hired to kill him. Since H. M. Wolfe uploaded to Amazon as a Kindle ebook, it has been a viral hit. "Did I finish, or did finish me?" a TikTok book influencer gushed . In February, Simon & Schuster paid seven figures to secure the publishing rights to the book and its sequel, which is due out next year.

The company has partnered with Pangram for the new tools. Substack has launched a new AI detection tool in partnership with Pangram. This will allow readers to scan Substack content for an assessment of how much of the material was written by AI. The tool can be used on text longer than 100 words that was published beginning today. Substack is also adding a new statement space for creators to explicitly share if and how they used AI for their content.

AI-detection tools are getting better. Basically every recent, high-profile accusation of someone passing off AI-generated writing as their own has started in the same way: with a tool called Pangram. In March, when a horror novel from a major publishing house was pulled just days before its scheduled U.S. release date, it was in part because Pangram, an AI-detection program, had identified the text as AI-generated. Other people have fed text into Pangram to suggest that chatbots have been used to write articles in major newspapers including, multiple short stories awarded a prestigious literary prize, and most recently, significant chunks of Pope Leo XIV's encyclical warning about the dangers of AI. The tool is also used by universities to vet student work and scientific associations to scan research papers.

We Asked the Author to Explain How He Used AI. A book about how AI shapes perceptions of reality came under fire for using AI-generated quotes. Its problems go beyond that. Earlier this month, WIRED published an excerpt from Steve Rosenbaum's buzzy new book,, which looks at how artificial intelligence warps people's sense of reality. Shortly thereafter, The New York Times reported that the book contained over a half-dozen made-up or misattributed quotes.

The Pope's Warnings About AI Were AI-Generated, a Detection Tool Claims Pangram Labs' updated Chrome extension puts warning labels on AI slop as you scroll your social feeds. On Monday, a brand-new Reddit account popped up on the widely read forum r/AmItheAsshole, where users have their personal disputes arbitrated by strangers. This particular user asked if they had crossed a line by "refusing to babysit my stepmother's kids because I have my own job and responsibilities." The post itself was succinct, straightforward, and grammatically clean, explaining a situation in which the person's stepmother and father often expected them to provide childcare on little notice, eventually leading to an argument. "Now there's tension at home, and I'm starting to wonder if I handled it the wrong way," the redditor concluded.

AI is rapidly transforming journalism, but the extent of its use in published newspaper articles remains unclear. We address this gap by auditing a large-scale dataset of 186K articles from online editions of 1.5K American newspapers published in the summer of 2025. Using Pangram, a state-of-the-art AI detector, we discover that approximately 9% of newly-published articles are either partially or fully AI-generated. This AI use is unevenly distributed, appearing more frequently in smaller, local outlets, in specific topics such as weather and technology, and within certain ownership groups. We also analyze 45K opinion pieces from Washington Post, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal, finding that they are 6.4 times more likely to contain AI-generated content than news articles from the same publications, with many AI-flagged op-eds authored by prominent public figures. Despite this prevalence, we find that AI use is rarely disclosed: a manual audit of 100 AI-flagged articles found only five disclosures of AI use. Overall, our audit highlights the immediate need for greater transparency and updated editorial standards regarding the use of AI in journalism to maintain public trust.