Readers are getting suspicious about AI. So I asked over 30 book editors how they were dealing with the problem of AI-generated book submissions. It took considerable labour to track these editors down in the first place.

Most email addresses were hidden from the public, so I tried to reverse-engineer them, making forensic alterations whenever an “unsent” message came through. I tried LinkedIn. I tried company websites, which had become labyrinthine after years of corporate mergers.

In the end, none of them would tell me anything. It was difficult to blame them for staying quiet. Any admission would have led to even more blame, the kind they were already getting in spades on social media.

They were taking audiences and advances from the deserving. They were destroying trust. And they were gatekeeping, but not doing so very well.

It was a few weeks after one of the biggest literary scandals of the year, and something in publishing had gone very wrong. This furore started with one book and one protagonist. The setup raised no eyebrows; like most main characters in the semi-feminist “femgore” niche, Gia was “thirty, alone, and unraveling quietly enough that [no one] noticed.

Yet.” Other things about Gia were slightly strange. Her tears, for example, felt “different. They are not despair, not hopelessness.

They feel like something else entirely—something sharp and terrifying, carving space for whatever comes next.” Almost everything in Gia’s story was sharp. She knew her competitors on the dating market were “sharper and shinier” than her. When she met a potential sugar daddy to take her out of financial ruin, his laughter was “sharp and jagged.” A paragraph later, his voice was “soft but sharp, a knife wrapped in velvet.” He asked her to act like a dog.

A hot shower was “sharp and grounding.” Her shame was “sharp as a knife edge;” her guilt was “sharp and intrusive.” In a trademark burst of catharsis, Gia turned into a real dog and mauled him to death. “My hands grip the wheel,” she said on her escape, “but they’re not hands anymore—claws, thick and dark, the tips sharp enough to leave faint scratches in the leather…” When Mia Ballard’s self-published Shy Girl rose to the top of Amazon’s horror chart last spring, several of the internet’s sharper readers smelled a sharp rat. “I recently started this book and I’m so confused by it… there are a lot of weird formatting issues?” one wrote on Reddit in May 2025.

“I thought maybe it was intentional, like the main character was losing her mind so her writing became unorganized. But now I’m thinking maybe it’s entirely AI written.” Nobody seemed to catch Shy Girl’s early reviews, or its strange sentence patterns, or its overuse of the word “sharp,” which popped up over 180 times in total. The canine saga exited the self-publishing world and reached editors at two different imprints without raising any actionable alarm.

Wildfire, an imprint of the Hachette-owned Headline Books, bought the novel and released it in the UK last November. It had all the requisite cover quotes and comparisons. It had an Ottessa Moshfegh-esque front cover featuring a glamorous Irish Wolfhound.

It was set to become the latest “female rage” sensation. Ballard was gearing up for an American release through Orbit Books, another Hachette imprint, when the accusations finally caught up with her. It took another lengthy Reddit post and a three-hour YouTube video to bring the writer down.

Ballard is the first traditionally published author to face serious career consequences after being accused of AI use. Shy Girl was withdrawn from publication last month. Orbit did not respond to a request for comment.

Industry peers have not taken the fallout well. “We are busting our balls over here, going to school for MFAs, writing many books over many years…” went a sharply-written post on Reddit’s traditional publishing forum, r/PubTips, “and Shy Girl literally was about to go on shelves in the US next month.” “We’re told constantly this industry is so rigorous, so discerning, and that’s why we have to wait months to hear back, why we have to get rejection after rejection…” commented another hopeful author, “and then this book, which anyone with a brain could tell was written by ChatGPT, gets picked up and ran with and seemingly no one in the process of publishing it noticed or cared.” Their frustration is understandable.

Most first-time novelists must finish a convincing, original manuscript before approaching multiple agents in a lengthy “querying” process. Agents decide whether books are likely to see commercial or literary success. If they sense potential, they’ll help authors through rounds of developmental and line edits.

End products “go on submission,” which means they’re finally offered up to editors at publishing houses. Every stage involves waiting, stress, and potential ego death. In a dynamic that has drawn considerable ire, this system keeps much of the writing public away from the literary esta