This past Tuesday, I received 37 pitches for upcoming books from 37 different publicists, each representing a different author. I'm constantly aware of the overwhelming number of books being published and the limited space available to cover them, made even more challenging as I prepare for my own book's July release. On the same day, newspapers like the Chicago Sun Times and the Philadelphia Inquirer revealed summer reading lists containing many books that don’t actually exist. These lists were part of a larger, low-quality summer package called The Heat Index. Shockingly, more than half of the titles were AI hallucinations—for example, The Longest Day by Rumaan Alam, described as “another tense narrative about a summer solstice celebration gone wrong”—which anyone with internet access could have easily fact-checked. Yet, this step was skipped entirely. It’s unclear exactly who is responsible. 404 Media later disclosed that both newspapers had licensed the package from King Features, a content distribution studio owned by Hearst. It appears the editorial staff were not involved in creating or commissioning this material; rather, a shadowy figure at the top made the deal to insert this churned-out content into their papers, likely causing embarrassment and frustration among the actual staff. This AI-related fiasco coincides with recent layoffs at both papers. AI poses a serious labor concern in creative industries because many of us understand that generative AI cannot adequately perform our jobs. Machines can’t reliably produce accurate facts or capture nuances—something business leaders who allocate corporate budgets seem reluctant to accept. I have written before about the paradox of too many books being published while coverage space, especially for arts, simultaneously declines (I’m always thankful for platforms like Lit Hub!).

Almost all these books are crafted, edited, and published with care, so promoting one amid fierce competition is already difficult—made worse when competing against fictional titles. I’ve also detailed the painstaking effort I put into creating book lists for various publications. Book lists are currently the most popular form of book criticism, and I take them seriously. Creating a list involves numerous factors: featuring the best books, ensuring diversity in topic, tone, author background, publisher size, and overall appeal. I weigh these carefully to produce balanced lists that reflect both my taste and the voice of the publication. I doubt ChatGPT or similar AI can replicate this nuanced judgment, and now it’s up to media executives and readers to recognize the value of this work. Recently, at a party, I asked a novelist for advice as I faced the final two months before my book’s launch. Her blunt reply: “Get used to feeling awful. ” Though likely an exaggeration for humor, the last months pre-publication are indeed stressful—the book is at the printer with no room for change, and authors lose control over many aspects, often resulting in anxious social media posts. I've been eagerly awaiting summer previews that might mention my book; sadly, none have appeared yet. The King Features summer reading list and the wider AI-generated content package, which apparently received no human review, represent a fresh insult from corporate media to those who value the written word. It disrespects journalists committed to truth, authors seeking coverage, book critics, publishing professionals, and, above all, readers.