Every week, I peer over the mountain of advanced review copies on my desk, wondering which book to read next. Too many books and too little time is the best problem (and career) to have. It may only take you a few seconds to scroll through ourmost anticipated summer reads, but it took weeks of reading and months of preparation to confidently bring you those 15 titles. Last week, the Chicago Sun-Times and The Philadelphia Inquirer ran a print insert with anAI-generated summer reading listfrom a third-party contributor. Several titles were made up. You won't find "The Last Algorithm" by Andy Weir or "The Collector's Piece" by Taylor Jenkins Reid in bookstores or libraries this summer because they don't exist. AI use is more common in workplaces than ever.Many argueit's a train we can only get on, not stop. But in both the book world and the journalism industry, this kind of AI-generated content threatens and undermines the creativity that makes us readers in the first place. Earlier this spring, the Chicago Sun-Timeslost 20% of its staffafter offering buyouts to curb financial woes. To bolster content, many outlets outsource syndicated third-party content. It's a common practice. USA TODAY, for example, hosts an (editorially reviewed) weekly column written by the American Booksellers Association that spotlightslocal bookstores around the country. But in a world wheremedia distrust rages high, AI-generated content only furthers skepticism of the industry as a whole, distracting from the crucial news and watchdog reporting communities need. The Chicago Sun-Times summer reading list was licensed from King Features, owned by magazine conglomerate Hearst. Freelancer Marco Buscagliatook responsibility for the pieceand confirmed he used AI. "We are looking into how this made it into print as we speak," Victor Lim, marketing director for parent company Chicago Public Media, saidin a statement to NPR. "This is licensed content that was not created by, or approved by, the Sun-Times newsroom, but it is unacceptable for any content we provide to our readers to be inaccurate. We value our readers' trust in our reporting and take this very seriously. More info will be provided soon as we investigate." Just as offensive as the fake titles is that some of the real ones on this list are decades old, like Ray Bradbury's 1957 "Dandelion Wine." Books are timeless pieces of media – there's no expiration date on a good read. But it's important to understand how crucial press attention is to an author and book's success. Millions of books are published globally each year. The odds that one book slips through the cracks and makes it on one of these lists are slim. But if it does, there's the potential for tens of thousands more eyes on an author's hard work. And historically, the book industry has been largely white. One study in The New York Times in 2020 showed that95% of over 7,000 books surveyedwere written by white people. While the industry has diversified since 2020,change has been slow, The Times later reported. As a man-made creation,generative AIcan amplify human biases, especially when it comes to representing women, LGBTQ+ individuals and people of color, AI experts previously told USA TODAY. If we rely on AI to choose the notable books of the year, we risk further marginalizing authors whose stories deserve to be heard. Large language models are trained on swaths of internet archives, so, naturally, a list like that published in the Chicago Sun-Times can't include new releases. AI can't sift through hundreds of emails from publishers to see what books are coming out this year and it certainly can't match the tireless effort of book publicists and marketers to get a book into your hands. It takes time and care to come up with a recommendation list. When you read one of ourmonthly new release recaps, know that each book is pored over and chosen in hopes of being your next great read. AI will never match the human intimacy of getting a book recommendation from someone who cares about you. AI can never replace the email exchanges with readers, swapping new and old titles we'd never otherwise pick up. It can never capture rage or laughter or grief in an audiobook narration. It can never cry at the end of a meaningful read. It can'tconnect a love story to the bench in Central Parkthat reminded you of what it means to be alive. Most of all, AI is a danger to what makes us readers in the first place. There's no way to package the human creative spirit in an AI prompt. We are readers because we relish in the slow possibilities of living in the pages of someone else's world. We are readers because we are hungry for meaning about humanity. And while AI may threaten jobs and undermine trust, it can never take away the knowledge and lives we've lived through stepping into a good book. Clare Mulroy is USA TODAY's Books Reporter, where she covers buzzy releases, chats with authors and dives into the culture of reading. Find heron Instagram, subscribe to our weeklyBooks newsletteror tell her what you're reading atcmulroy@usatoday.com. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Chicago Sun-Times runs AI summer reading list: Why that's dangerous
