Apparently, culture was a paradise of intelligence and originality until someone opened ChatGPT.

Not really!

Reality television built around humiliation. Clickbait stretching one fact across twelve paragraphs. Influencers recycling the same staged revelation. Corporate thought leadership containing neither thought nor leadership.

All lovingly produced by humans.

Human-made is a statement of origin. It is not a certificate of quality.

That is what bothers me about the “AI slop” debate. Too often, the production method becomes the verdict. Mention AI and suddenly nobody needs to consider whether the work is insightful, entertaining or any good.

I have watched television formats that made me want to apologise to my own brain. Their entirely human production did not improve the experience.

Of course AI slop exists. AI makes it ridiculously easy to flood the internet with generic articles, fabricated expertise and disposable images. The ability to generate a thousand articles does not give anyone a thousand things worth saying.

But dismissing all AI-assisted work ignores what these tools also make possible: An individual turning an original idea into an illustrated story, a song or a publication that previously required resources they simply did not have.

That deserves curiosity.

And we need a name for work that earns it.

I propose AI Craft.

Work created with AI and shaped by human purpose, taste, judgment and responsibility. AI with a point of view.

That is what I aim for with Silicon Drama, my eTatos series about the people, power struggles and egos shaping the technology industry.

Yes, I use AI. I also decide whose moves matter, which conflicts deserve attention, where satire belongs and what gets deleted. A plausible rumour must remain a rumour. A beautiful image can still be wrong for the story. A polished paragraph can still say absolutely nothing.

The goal is for you to recognise me in the result: My interests, my scepticism, my humour and my interpretation of the drama.

Whether I succeed is for readers to decide. “AI Craft” should be a standard to meet, not a medal I award myself.

And responsibility comes with it. If I publish an error, blaming the model is no defence. If something is fictional or synthetic, I should not pass it off as evidence.

Slop fills the feed. Craft gives you a reason to stop.

So ask whether a piece rewards your attention. Does it offer an idea, something new, a laugh, a useful insight, a story worth following? Is it honest about what it presents?

Demand that from AI creators. Demand it from human creators too.

I use AI. I take responsibility for what I publish. Judge what I made.

Dirk