Ann Handley

Meta used all 3 of my books & millions of other books, ebooks, and research papers to train its AI.

All without consent, compensation, copyright concern, credit. You find out only by searching a database published a few days ago by The Atlantic.
 
It's sketchy AF. I’ll tell you why in a sec. But first… should we care?

If you’re on the list, you have one of two reactions:

🥳 Honored! Flattered! My work is worthy!

😳 Ummm WTH. What about consent, compensation, etc.?

More broadly: Should you care whether Meta used 72 books from David Sedaris? 200 from Margaret Atwood? The entire library of everyone everywhere?

What’s missing in this conversation is that Meta intentionally made *a choice*... as the kids say. They actively chose to steal the books, instead of going through the proper & legal channels, because the legal way was too slow.

TOO SLOW.

That’s problematic, isn’t it? Look, I use AI. I see its value. But the scale of this is nuts. And gross.

Here's the story:

If Llama 3 was to compete, it needed to be trained on a huge amount of high-quality writing – books, not Instagram captions or LinkedIn posts. Acquiring all of that text legally could take time.

“Yo ho ho! Should we pirate it instead?” they wondered.

“Abso-tooting-lootly,“ they said back to themselves. “Let’s loot all the books!“

So they went to LibGen, a pirated library with more than 7.5 million books and 81 million research papers. The Llama 3 team looted and rolled around in all the words like they were pirates rolling in gold doubloons. And they basically were.

So is it problematic? Yes. Here’s why:

🏴‍☠️ We’re normalizing the theft of IP to an absurd degree.

A giant tech company should not feel entitled to scoop up all our words like they’re in a bulk bin at a Dollar Tree & run straight out of the door with them.

🏴‍☠️ Gen AI often presents like all-knowing oracles, uncoupled from sources. This “decontextualizes knowledge“ (the Atlantic's phrase). This severs the work from the author. It prevents true collaboration. It makes it harder for creators & researchers to build an acknowledged body of work.

🏴‍☠️ It’s not colorless, odorless “data.” It’s words that make up sentences that make up paragraphs that make up pages that writers have created, crafted, coaxed into the world. Words with handprints, heart-prints, bitemarks, scratches from us trying to shape them into something that delights you.

Do I sound like I’m being precious about words? About writing? It’s because I am.

* * *

I don’t have all the answers. But I do know this:

Clarity, consent, compensation. Is it too much to ask that AI companies be transparent about data sources and use, obtain permission from creators, and provide fair payment for using their works?

Just me?

So the guy seated next to me on this flight to LaGuardia is going hard on the low-hanging elephant in the room. 🍎🐘

Let’s play another rousing round of Buzzword Bingo…! Points to whoever guesses what he says next.

I just found out that my new book deadline is *next Friday* (Thought it was June something? WHAT.) So I’m screaming, crying, throwing up while simultaneously locked in like a cat chasing a laser beam.

UGGGGGGH SEND GOOD VIBES PLZ 🙏

Weird one today!

I innocently used the word “bugger” in my newsletter yesterday. It triggered a profanity freak-out at some domains, which returned this... uh, warmly human auto-responder.

For context: I was talking about how Gen AI can be aggressively "helpful" in ways we don't always want. (“Would you like me to smooth the flow? Would you like me to shape this? Would you like me to microwave you a waffle?”)

NO I WOULD NOT… the bugger.

Two thoughts:

> Profanity filters are still *a thing*? I thought they were a relic of the Early Cyber-Victorian Era? Who knew?

> I had no idea “bugger” is a curse? I looked it up. My bad, I guess. 😳

My mom used to call me a “cheeky little bugger,” which now calls my entire childhood into question.

* * *

I am tempted to ask what other curse words I don’t know about… but that might get us all banned here, too. 🫣

This week's obsession: What happens to email marketing when AI manages the inbox? Does that mean email marketing as we know it is dead? 💀

Email has been the GOAT for years. I've probably told all of you at least once: Email has been the only place where people—not algorithms—are in charge.

It’s been the only place where people *choose* to hear from you, instead of standing in the center of the Marketing Square, shaking a tin cup at the Fickle Algo Gods for a few puny shillings of attention. Email lets you show up in an inbox like, hey, 'sup.

I’ve loved that for us. I’ve loved the high bar it has created for serious marketers.

But now that’s all changing. The robots are in the inbox now, too. Or they will be.

Soon—if not already—email messages are filtered, summarized, collapsed, prioritized, pasteurized, pulverized, purified, processed, and (I'm out of P words) before a human ever sees them. A human is summoned only according to certain set parameters. (Another P word! There it is!)

For marketing, that means the holy grail of permission no longer guarantees visibility.

Deliverability doesn’t guarantee it, either. It’s not enough to make sure all your T’s are crossed & I’s are dotted so you land in the primary inbox, high-fiving all the other emails that dropped in alongside you. YOU MADE IT is no longer the goal.

The new goal is neither access nor deliverability. It’s being *chosen*.

>>> The old way: deliverability was king.
>>> The new way: selection is king.

It means a person plucking your fresh email, new & telling AI: "Yo. Save those for just me, bestie."

Your relationship with the recipient is the difference between being seen… and being skipped.

For years, we optimized for deliverability—how to get in. Now we need to optimize for selection—how to be chosen. That changes the work, right?

👉 From messaging → making meaning
Not just delivering info, but helping your reader make sense of it.

👉 From broadcasting messages → corresponding with people
Pillow over the face of “dear audience.” More “hey this is for you” energy.

👉 From scale-first → story-first
Less sending for the sake of sending; more personality and point of view.

The only email strategy that actually works from here on out is being someone your reader would genuinely miss if you stopped showing up.

That’s a relationship problem, a writing challenge, and—if you’re willing to invest the time—an opportunity.

When speed becomes cheap, judgment carries a premium. That’s true in marketing strategy. It’s true in content. And now…it’s especially true in email.

We need to show up differently when AI is triaging the inbox.

Do this: Pull up your last 3 email sends. Look yourself squarely in the eye and answer with unflinching honesty:

Would an AI assistant surface this for my reader?
Would my reader save it for their own human eyes?
Is this genuinely worth their time?

That, my friends, is the new bar. And actually… I kind of love this new bar for us, too. You?

AI literacy is not prompt literacy. It's *judgment literacy*.

One thing we don't talk about enough:

Education around AI can't just mean teaching people HOW to use it. It has to mean teaching people when NOT to use it. And WHY. (Shouty-caps for emphasis.)

That distinction matters not just for people like us—marketers and creators. But for educators, managers, parents, leaders... anyone shaping how other people think, work, learn, decide, and create.

To me the real skill worth honing isn't prompt fluency or knowing how to boss around an AI agent.

The real skill is judgment. Knowing when AI helps. Knowing when it shortcuts the very struggle that teaches us something. Knowing when speed is useful... and when it actually erodes agency, creativity, trust, understanding.

It's doing things the long, hard, human-fumbling-in-the-dark way when there's value in that hard way. It's choosing the long road in a shortcut world when the process of the work is the joy of the work.

So why do we keep teaching people how to use AI—without ever teaching them when not to?

P.S. Em dashes ALL MINE MINE MINE.

"Ten Marketing Books That Aged Surprisingly Well."

Everybody Writes made this list I saw today alongside books by David Ogilvy, Seth Godin, the Heath bros, and Claude C. Hopkins... who I *really* can't tag here because his classic Scientific Advertising came out in 1923, when LinkedIn's feed was written with a Blackwing pencil and delivered by horse.

I’ll put the list linky in comments. But first, 2 thoughts!

>> MORE WOMEN DESERVE TO BE ON LISTS LIKE THESE <<

Of course I’m grateful to be included. But 9 books by men, 1 book by a woman (me) is yikes. Marketing books that have staying power and have changed my thinking include books by Denise Yohn, Nancy Duarte, Sally Hogshead, April Dunford.

>> DO WORK THAT LASTS WHEN IT MATTERS <<

I paused for a long time at the word "surprisingly" in the article's headline. “Why should it be surprising when good work lasts?” my brain kept kneading, like a kitten making biscuits.

Sometimes it feels like in this hurry-up, instantly-conjured, add-water-and-stir-for-results world we are so focused on making things for the moment... that we don’t make things that matter beyond this moment. (Because this moment will pass, besties. It always does.)

Make the thing you can't *NOT* make. For some it might be a book. Or an epic speech. An idea worth exploring. But also: Don’t think merely about getting it finished, shipped, published, or checked off your list. Think about what it might change. And what might still matter years from now.

And (this is key!): Think about who YOU might become in the process.

Everybody Writes changed my career. But more importantly, it changed ME. And if I'm lucky, it changed something for someone else, too.

And yeah... everything we make does not need to last. Everything does not deserve more of our time & attention & care & love & biscuit-kneading. Of course not. But I believe some things do. The trick is knowing which.

And maybe I think about this too much. IDK. Just me?

Hey so a few weeks ago I posted an SOS here for support because my new book deadline was a full month earlier than I expected.

Then I ghosted you. Initially, to ignore everything & rewrite rewrite <...pause to cry...> rewrite. Later, to try to calm my nervous system down and sleep and rest my left eyelid, which had started twitching somewhere between Chapter 1 and Chapter Done.

Eyelid Twitch is a gentle, intermittent fluttering, like my eyelid is sending me distress signals in Morse code. "ABORT. We are sTreSS*d," Eyelid Twitch taps out. "R U ok?"

I've been documenting Eyelid Twitch in a Gripe Journal: Daily grievance documentation for science, for history, for my future biographer writing how my story ended tragically after I was brought down by an undiagnosed brain bleed that presented as a gentle eyelid fluttering.

Anyway, the book. I never updated you. So (BIG NEWS!): I FINISHED THE BOOK. I HIT THE DEADLINE! (Please clap!)

Yet Eyelid Twitch remains. When I mention Eyelid Twitch (incessantly, if you must know), a lot of people pipe up.... "Yes! I once had an eyelid twitch, too!"

It's called eyelid myokymia, by the way. Myokymia comes from the Greek for “muscle” + “wave.” A waving muscle sounds beautiful and poetic until you realize it means your eyelid has stopped tapping out Morse code and that the “wave” is a small white flag of surrender from the *sTreSS*.

So now I'm bringing the question here, to you on LinkedIn: Can we bond over this?

Have you had Eyelid Twitch?

Where did yours come from?

Stress...? Sleep deprivation...? Too much time staring glassy-eyed at Chapter 29 because wut r werds...? A Reply-All incident from 2016 your body never let go of...?

And most importantly, in the name of science and public service: how did you get it to GO AWAY?!

👉 Help Wanted: MarketingProfs seeks volunteers to act as door scanners at the B2B Forum, November 18-19 in Boston. You get a conference pass in exchange for a few hours of scanning joy & power tripping.

Sound good? Read on...

WANTED: BADGE-SCANNING ENTHUSIASTS & ASPIRING QR CODE ENFORCERS

Tired of watching highway patrol officers have all the fun with their radar guns? Do you dream of the day you'll hear the satisfying "beep" of a grocery scanner in your hands?

Well... put down that hairdryer you've been pretending is a speed gun and stop practicing on your cat's microchip.... I've got the perfect opportunity for you!

Join our elite team of Badge Scanning Specialists at the MarketingProfs B2B Forum. You'll be the gatekeeper -- the first line of defense against badge fraud and conference crashers. Think of yourself as a bouncer -- no biceps required.

Key Responsibilities:

👉 Maintain a Law and Order/Olivia Benson-like focus on incoming attendees
👉 Scan badges with the precision and enthusiasm of a grocery clerk amped on Red Bull
👉 Achieve new personal bests in "Scans Per Minute" (SPM)
👉 Perfect your disappointed head shake for those who forgot their badges

Required Qualifications:

👉 One-day commitment (you can attend the rest of the event as you wish)
👉 Ability to point and click without injuring yourself or others

Bonus Points:

👉 Experience in "shooting" colleagues with finger guns

What you'll get:

🥳 Free Pass to the MarketingProfs B2B Forum (Attend all the sessions you want when you're off duty!)

🥳 New connections, new friends, renewed love for B2B Marketing

🥳 Access to all the parties, food, shenanigans.
FYI: There is a Tater Tot Bar. AGAIN: THERE IS A TATER. TOT. BAR!

🥳 Comfy staff T-shirt of a distinct poly-cotton blend with a braggy “EVENT STAFF” on the back

🥳 High-five and deep appreciation from me + Team MarketingProfs

Travel and hotel not included, because I'm not made of money.

Interested? Drop us a line here:

>>> https://lnkd.in/gN2VtqbU <<<

Pass this along, please! And thanks so much!

P.S. We also need a room host or two: Folks who can keep sessions running smoothly, introduce speakers, and make sure everyone’s hydrated and having a good time. It's like emceeing-*lite*. Indicate you're down for that on the form, too.