Long before conversations about artificial intelligence started dominating headlines, I was spending much of my life behind a camera capturing moments in remote villages and breathtaking landscapes, always with the goal of telling deeper stories through imagery. Photography has never just been a creative outlet for me; it’s a way of seeing the world more clearly and helping others do the same. That passion eventually led to the formation of Compassion Gallery, a non-profit initiative I co-founded with the mission of sharing God’s beauty through photography and using 100% of the profits to support trusted ministries and local charities around the world.
At one of our Compassion Gallery events, I had an interesting exchange that’s stuck with me.
Someone walked by our booth, glanced at a wall filled with sunrise and sunset prints, and confidently stated, “I can always tell the difference between a sunrise and a sunset.”
I smiled. “Want to test that theory?”
We went photo by photo. One by one. “Sunrise or sunset?”
When we were done going through the photos, they scored about 25%. You could have flipped a coin and done better.
Why share that story? Because I hear a lot of people these days say the same kind of thing about writing and AI:
“I can always tell when something’s written by AI.”
Really? Always?
The reality is that AI has become remarkably good at mimicking human tone and structure — and just like with sunrises and sunsets, there are tells, sure, but they’re not nearly as reliable as people think.
I read one article where the “expert author” confidently stated that em dashes (—) were a sure sign of AI-generated content. Funny thing is, I’ve been using em dashes since I was a teenager — and overusing them, according to some of my editors and friends.
Other “experts” have noted that bolding or italicizing throughout a post is a sure sign of AI. Again, I’ve been bolding and italicizing phrases to highlight key findings for as long as I can remember.
So, am I an AI-bot? Obviously not.
The point is this: you can’t always judge a book by its cover or a post by its punctuation or writing style.
Here are some better questions: Is the content helpful? Is it truthful? Is it relevant? Is it pointing people toward something meaningful?
We live in a world where AI is not just emerging — it’s here. It’s being used in everything from simple writing prompts to solving complex scientific problems. That’s not a defense of AI. In many ways, I wish it didn’t exist at all. But it does, and as with any tool, we’re left with a responsibility: to steward it well.
If an author chooses to use AI to help better formulate their thoughts, is that wrong? If a marketing team builds a series of bullet points and uses AI to stitch them together into a compelling story, does that invalidate the message?
Tools, by nature, are neutral; the real question is what we do with them.
And yes, let’s also acknowledge the danger. Like the internet or any technology, AI can be weaponized. It can be used for evil: deepfakes, misinformation, manipulation. I’m not endorsing any of that; not even close.
But when it comes to writing, let’s focus on the heart of the message. Let’s evaluate the value, the substance — the fruit.
So next time you read something and think, “That feels like it was written by AI,” maybe pause. Instead, ask: “Is it helpful? Is it meaningful? Does it serve a greater purpose?”
Because whether it’s a sunrise or a sunset, sometimes it’s not about knowing how it was created — but why.
---
At Radiant, we’ve always been about excellence and clarity — not gimmicks or trends. Whether it's brand strategy, UX, technology or digital media, our mission has been the same: to reflect the radiance of Christ through creativity and truth. We’re here to help.
