Book community slams 'fake' list of summer reads as none of the books are real
Book fans are outraged after a US newspaper published a 2025 summer reading list full of books that no one can actually read. The problem? Almost all of the novels were AI -generated.
The scandal began after the listicle was published by the Chicago Sun Times on May 18 as an editorial insert titled The Heat Index. This included works by bestselling and award-winning authors, like Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo author Taylor Jenkins-Reid, Maggie O'Farrell, Min Lin Jee and 2025 Pulitzer-prize winner Percival Everett. However, book-lovers were quick to discover that there was something suspect about the novels. Namely, they didn't exist.
Though, perhaps the biggest scandal was how unimaginative the AI book titles were. According to the list, New York Times bestseller Brit Bennett had written 'Hurricane Season' (exploring 'family bonds tested by natural disasters') and Rebecca Makkai had published 'Boiling Point' (a climate activist is 'forced to reckon with her own environmental impact' after an argument with her teenage daughter).
Meanwhile, one attributed 'The Last Algorithm' to Andy Weir, an American sci-fi author perhaps best-known The Martian. Ironically, the fake book's plot summary described 'a programmer who discovers that an AI-system has developed consciousness – only to discover it has secretly been influencing global events for years.'
Social media book fans were quick to point out the inaccuracies. 'Hey @chicagosuntimes - what in the AI wrote this is this??? I can assure you, Maggie O'Farrell did not write Migrations. And I don't have enough characters to point out all of the other inaccuracies. Do better. You should have paid someone to write this,' 'Booktuber' Tina Books wrote on BlueSky.
Others accused the writer of using ChatGPT – which is prone to making 'hallucinations' – to write the text. 'I went into my library's database of Chicago area newspapers to confirm this isn't fake, and it's not. Why the hell are you using ChatGPT to make up book titles? You used to have a books staff. Absolutely no fact checking?' Book Riot editor Kelly Jensen wrote on BlueSky.
To add even more confusion to the mix, some of the book titles included were actually real, like Call Me By Your Name by Andre Aciman and Atonement by Ian McEwan.
The writer of the list admitted to 404 media that the article had been partly generated by AI. He said: "I do use AI for background at times but always check out the material first. This time, I did not and I can't believe I missed it, because it's so obvious. No excuses. On me 100 per cent and I'm completely embarrassed."
But how exactly did this pass into a news outlet? The vice-president of marketing at the Chicago Sun Times, Victor Lim, later told 404 Media that the Heat Index section had been licensed by the company King Features – which is owned by the magazine giant Hearst.
Lim said that no one from Chicago Public Media reviewed the section, as it came from a newspaper, so they 'falsely made the assumption' that there would be an editorial process already in place. He added that they would be updating this policy in future.
However, it's left many on social media feeling concern of AI usage in media. Reacting to the story, one TikTok user wrote: 'This is why AI cannot replace humans. You still need journalists, you still need actual book reviewers, and people who go to the theatre. AI is not meant to replace despite corporate greed.'
The union that represents editorial employees at the newspaper, The Sun-Times Guild, confirmed to CBC News that the summer guide was a syndicated section produced externally "without the knowledge of the members of our newsroom."
They added: "We're deeply disturbed that AI-generated content was printed alongside our work. The fact that it was sixty-plus pages of this 'content' is very concerning — primarily for our relationship with our audience but also for our union's jurisdiction."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Metro
9 hours ago
- Metro
I turned to ChatGPT to explain why my date went so wrong
'Let their action determine your next move – not your hope'. Staring down at my phone screen, I was so relieved to read these words. Trying to find the reason for yet another disastrous date, I had turned to the best source of clear, unbiased advice I could think of: ChatGPT. Sure, it wasn't exactly romantic but suddenly the patterns of my dating life were all starting to make sense, and I wasn't stuck in an agonising mental loop trying to figure it out. Two weeks previously, I had woken up in a hotel room, in a foreign city, rigid, shaking and tearful – my nervous system shot to pieces from a day spent masking and being on edge. My date had just left. I'd asked him if he thought we'd see each other again. 'It's not a hard yes but it's not a hard no,' he said. I understood he meant 'no'. I'd recently read a book about attachment styles and avoidant men and yet here I was again, rejected. Our first date had been amazing… How had it gone so wrong? Flashback to a couple of months earlier. I was back on the apps after a two-year break, and was just as bored as I'd been when I used them before. Too many men just wanted to text and never meet. X Factor icon Diana Vickers and Metro's dating expert Alice Giddings dive into your wildest sex, love, and dating dilemmas – every Tuesday. Listen wherever you get your podcasts or watch on YouTube. And be sure to follow and subscribe so you never miss an episode. You can also join the fun on our WhatsApp Group Chat here – share your dilemmas and Diana and Alice may just give you a call. When a Dutch guy popped up, in town for a few days, I swiped past his profile because of its lack of detail. But, when he bypassed the small talk and suggested a spontaneous meet-up I thought, why not? I'd been planning on doing a nature hike the next day – he would either be good company or, at worst, good exercise for a couple of hours. I never count first meets as dates and I knew the hiking route was popular and safe. We arrived almost at the same time and he was easy to pick out from his photo. I wasn't immediately attracted – but he turned out to be excellent company. We talked about relationships, psychology and gender roles, careers, crypto, my kids and that fact he wanted children and a dog. When the hike was over, he suddenly kissed me. 'I just felt like kissing you, so I did,' he said. It was flattering, though I was mainly buzzing from the mental stimulation that comes from great conversation. So, How Did It Go? is a weekly series that will make you cringe with second-hand embarrassment or ooze with jealousy as people share their worst and best date stories. Want to spill the beans about your own awkward encounter or love story? Contact I suggested we meet again that evening and he agreed. Now I was counting it as a date. It was fun to do my hair and feel exhilarated about someone for the first time in ages. We flirted and kissed all night and had genuine, deep conversations. Three times he said, 'Well, if you come to Holland…' I got home at 5am on a high, faith in dating apps restored. We messaged a couple of times throughout his last day and I asked if he'd meant it that I should visit. His answer was a bit of a cold shower: 'The offer still stands but you'll have to get an Airbnb'. I talked myself round; I wouldn't be comfortable in someone's house after just one date, anyway. So I booked a flight and hotel for two months' time. We texted occasionally in the meantime, which was fine by me. He checked in about my flight and asked if there was anything I wanted to do. There were some cheesy, sexual messages which were not so fine by me but by then my flight was tied to a work trip and cancelling would have been expensive and complicated. He picked me up from the airport and he was friendly but not affectionate. I followed his lead but from the outset, I was confused about what the vibe was meant to be. Our second date was a long, boring day spent talking, hanging out and going to the cinema to see the new Bridget Jones. He was still an interesting conversationalist but it was completely platonic – he didn't flirt or touch me – and I was increasingly on edge, trying to work out what was going on while acting like things were fine. When we left the cinema, he suddenly asked, 'Would you like me to come to your hotel?' I said yes, thinking this would be how we got back to what it was like before. But when we got there, he whipped out a packet of condoms – and a sex toy. 'That's way too zero to 60 for me,' I told him. But I was looking for the missing connection and so had sex. He came, I didn't, he didn't seem to notice and, shocker, I didn't feel connected. Back home, I didn't expect to hear from him again but, a week later, he messaged to say he thought we should leave it there as 'an unexpected adventure'. I wasn't interested in him any longer but I was keen to understand what the hell happened, and I needed to know how to break my pattern of always being drawn to avoidant men. Most of all, I couldn't get one question out of my head: why would he invite me to visit (three times!) and then act completely uninterested and cold? That's when I thought of ChatGPT. I created a relationship therapist and trained it on attachment styles based on the book I'd read. I fed in a detailed account of both dates and the exported file of our short but, it turns out, revealing WhatsApp chats. ChatGPT immediately analysed all the signs he was avoidant and not genuinely interested. There were far more of them than I'd seen myself. His spontaneous kiss after the hike, asking if I wanted him to come back to my hotel – both could be interpreted as low-risk, high-reward plays if he wasn't invested in the outcome. The big mystery was solved when ChatGPT showed me how I had mistakenly heard a genuine invitation when what he had actually said was 'vague, polite, and non-committal, designed to keep the moment feeling warm without emotional responsibility […] which he never backed up with: Initiative. A plan. Clear interest in seeing you again.' It was clear how his non-invitation had dictated everything about the second date. If I'd known, I never would have gone. More Trending Since then, I've honestly enjoyed talking about dating with ChatGPT far more than the actual dates. I've used my AI therapist to unpick two previous disastrous experiences with avoidant men, mentally broken up with an unrequited two-year crush and reformulated my Hinge profile to add emotional depth specifically to repel avoidants. My profile no longer centres the idea that I'm fun, easy-going and available to hang out as that is catnip to them. I hardly get any matches now, which is great, actually. View More » I am optimistic, however. Maybe there aren't that many secure single men out there but at least AI means I will never get caught in an entanglement with one of them again. Do you have a story you'd like to share? Get in touch by emailing Share your views in the comments below. MORE: I told my husband 'we're over' after carrying the mental load alone MORE: My 'healthy' habit landed me in A&E – I was given a warning MORE: Lyme disease destroyed my life – it all started with a tick
Scottish Sun
12 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
MAFS superfan Cara Delevingne messaged show star she's ‘obsessed' with after explosive row with ex husband aired
PALS AT FIRST SWIPE? MAFS superfan Cara Delevingne messaged show star she's 'obsessed' with after explosive row with ex husband aired Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) BRIT model Cara Delevingne is 'obsessed' with Married At First Sight Australia's standout star Jamie Marinos - and slid into her DMs to tell her. The reality star, 29, was a huge hit with British fans, with around a million tuning in most nights on E4 to watch her dish out no-nonsense, hard-hitting advice to fellow contestants. Many more viewers caught up on streaming. Sign up for the Entertainment newsletter Sign up 5 Cara is a huge fan of MAFS Australia star Jamie Credit: Getty 5 Jamie Marinos shot to fame on the Aussie version of MAFS, but has been in the UK recently Credit: Instagram 5 Jamie was paired with Dave on the iconic series Credit: Nine Jamie was heralded as a 'voice of reason' during explosive dinner party bust ups that left multiple contestants - including Jamie - in floods of tears. But the reality star is buoyed by the support of the public, and her new A List fans. Jamie says: 'Cara Delevingne actually slid into my DMs and she still follows me. 'I should have this message printed and hung up somewhere, she messaged me: 'Obsessed with you!' 'I hope she was screaming at the TV - and I hope she was just as pissed off at my ex-husband as I was.' Jamie was left shocked and heartbroken when she told her husband Dave Hand that she had fallen in love with him, only to be told her feelings were no longer reciprocated. The couple still confirmed their vows at the end of the series, but their marriage had ended by the time the cast got together for a reunion. She says she endured a traumatic 'public humiliation', and she and Dave no longer speak. Cara, 32, has endured her own relationship dramas, having previously been linked to Harry Styles, singer St. Vincent, actress Ashley Benson. She told last year how one 'really horrible breakup' left her so distraught, she had to move in with pal Taylor Swift, telling Interview magazine: 'She looked after me so well." But Cara has happily been in a relationship with singer Leah Mason, known as Minke, since 2022. Jamie said she got through her hurt by 'trauma dumping into ChatGPT', as she says she appreciates the AI system's lack of judgement. Married At First Sight's Awhina breaks silence on Billy romance after pair went 'Instagram official' In a shock to viewers, since the show, she has also briefly dated another of the show's grooms, Eliot Donovan, who was married to two brides during the series. Jamie now says she could potentially see a future together - though their romance proved tricky as they live in different states in Australia. Jamie says: 'Of course I potentially could see a future with Eliot. We do have a really beautiful friendship - there are a lot of qualities that I would want in a future partner, and I think vice versa. 'We do have a lot of respect for each other but I also think there's probably characteristics that we'd want that we might not have in each other… Married At First Sight Australia Couples 2025 Lauren, 37, Business Owner, and Clint, 43, Pro Golfer Eliot, 35, Business Owner, and Veronica, 32, Personal Trainer/Actor Beth, 28, Salon Manager, and Teejay, 28, Business Development Manager Jacqui, 29, Consultant, and Ryan, 36, Project Manager Morena, 57, DJ/Fitness Instructor, and Tony, 53, Charter Captain Rhi, 34, Account Manager, and Jeff, 39, Electrician Ashleigh, 34, Dance Studio Owner, and Jake, 30, Teacher Awhina, 30, Aged Care Worker, and Adrian, 30, E-Commerce Business Owner Sierah, 31, Financial Associate Advisor, and Billy, 31, Plasterer Jamie, 28, Account Manager, and Dave, 36, Builder Katie, 37, CEO and Tim, 38, Primary School Teacher Carina, 31, Digital Marketing Manager and Paul, 30, Wellness Advisor 'I'm an intense person in a romantic relationship. I love hard and I'm not too sure if that's the kind of intensity that is in Eliot. 'I think this whole experience made me realise that just because they're better than the previous person, doesn't mean they're the person I am supposed to be with. 'I think that's my problem - I try to fit them in the mould. But this time, I'm so close to settling and being unhappy and not having my needs met, that I want to make sure I'm making the right decision the next time round.' But she is open to dating again, adding: "The only romantic interest I've had since Dave has been Eliot so it's been a very, very quiet time - I'm trying to break that habit." Jamie has been approached to appear on other TV shows, and would like to "dip into the cookie jar" of acting, next, too. While in the UK, she has hung out with Baywatch star Pamela Anderson and Taken's Liam Neeson at the Naked Gun premiere in London and appeared on ITV Daytime's Lorraine. 5 Cara slid into Jamie's DMs after watching her on the show Credit: Getty
The Guardian
16 hours ago
- The Guardian
Authority: Essays on Being Right by Andrea Long Chu review
Andrea Long Chu stands accused of not playing by the rules, of appraising works of fiction as if they were essays or confessions rather than aesthetic objects. 'It is true that I tend to treat a novel like an argument', she writes in the introduction to Authority, a collection of essays and reviews published between 2018 and 2023 in outlets such as N+1, Bookforum and New York Magazine. Long Chu – who won a Pulitzer prize for criticism in 2023 – believes 'all novels refract the veiled subjectivity of their authors', and to pretend otherwise is to indulge a 'pernicious form of commodity fetishism'. In her reviews, books betray their authors, invariably revealing some kernel of inadequacy – be it immaturity, myopia or just terminal dullness. This approach borders on the psychoanalytical, and makes for fun reading. Long Chu diagnoses a case of 'Munchausen by proxy' in Hanya Yanagihara, whose bestselling novels A Little Life (2015) and To Paradise (2022) are powered by 'the misery principle': 'horrible things happen to people for no reason', and the author is 'a sinister kind of caretaker, poisoning her characters in order to nurse them lovingly back to health'. She notes a troubling tendency towards 'infantile' idealisation of mothers and girlfriends in Tao Lin's autofiction, and finds 'something deeply juvenile' about the scatological motifs in Ottessa Moshfegh's novels. Moshfegh's medieval gore-fest Lapovona (2022), fails to shock, because 'You cannot épater le bourgeois without an actual bourgeoisie'; 'the leading coprophile of American letters' is trying too hard to convince us she's not a prude. Reviewing Bret Easton Ellis's 'deeply needless' 2019 essay collection, White ('less a series of glorified, padded-out blog posts than a series of regular, normal-size blog posts'), Long Chu bemoans his descent into fogeyish paranoia, and suggests the author of American Psycho is starting to resemble his most famous creation. 'At some point,' she quips, 'one must ask if a man who sees Nineteen Eighty-Four all around him is really just stuck in the 80s.' A takedown of Curtis Sittenfeld's 2020 novel, Rodham, which imagines an alternative universe where Hillary Clinton never married Bill, is a withering indictment of hollow girl-boss feminism: this is 'an unpolitical book by an unpolitical author about … an unpolitical person'; Sittenfeld's complacency mirrors that of her protagonist, a woman whose 'true talent lies in persuading college-educated people that her ambition, and by extension theirs, is a genuine expression of competence'. A recurring figure in these essays is the successful author with a gripe about oversensitive lefty youngsters and social media mobs. These include Ellis, Moshfegh, Maggie Nelson – whose complaints about art-world censoriousness in On Freedom are dismissed with a huffily italicised 'boring' – and Zadie Smith, whose 'habit of sympathizing with the least sympathetic party in any given situation frequently drives her to the political center'. Long Chu provocatively suggests this tendency is a bit of an act, compensating for Smith's failure to produce a touchstone work of social realism: since Smith has 'never actually excelled at constructing the kind of sympathetic, all-too-human characters she advocates for', she makes up for it with a lofty bothsidesism she thinks becoming of a serious, above-the-fray liberal humanist. Long Chu is similarly unsparing in her critique of the publishing industry's patronising and counterproductive tendency to over-hype minority voices in order to atone for past wrongs. ('This is to respond to pigeonholing by overstating the value of being a pigeon.') In a refreshingly clear-sighted essay on Asian American fiction, she questions whether the experiences depicted in a glut of diaspora novels have anything significant in common beyond their 'diffident, aimless, frustrated' protagonists and a vague melancholy; the much-laboured theme of identity manifests as little more than 'a sensation, a mild, chronic homesickness', and 'the acute experience of racial indeterminacy has diffused into something more banal'. Alongside the literary essays, Authority features dissections of TV shows and video games, and a wryly funny meditation on Andrew Lloyd Webber's musical shortcomings. (His winning strategy as a composer is 'not to persuade but to overwhelm'.) There are also several personal pieces including an essay on vaginoplasty, a fictionalised account of undergoing transcranial magnetic stimulation (a treatment for depression), and On Liking Women, a widely shared 2018 essay about the author's gender transition that kickstarted her writing career. Here Long Chu draws a connecting line between the gender separatist ideology of 1970s political lesbianism and today's anti-trans activists, whom she accuses of laundering 'garden-variety moral disgust'. In another era, such personal material would have sat uneasily in a volume of criticism, and it says something about our cultural moment that it doesn't seem particularly out of place here. As Long Chu observes in the title essay, the subjectivity of the critic is an increasingly visible presence these days. Tracing the vexed debates around critical authority from the 18th century to the present day, she concludes that the concept has always been 'an incoherent, inconsistent, and altogether empty thing'. The job of today's critic is not so much to impart expertise but to become a storyteller in their own right: 'The critic has become a witness, one whose job is to offer up an event within her own experience in such a way that the reader, if she is so inclined, may experience it too.' This checks out. Though Long Chu's writing style is not as overtly chummy as that of her fellow US critic Lauren Oyler, it has a similarly disarming first-person candour, offsetting stridency with spasms of self-effacing humility, and the sort of tentative qualifications more commonly encountered in spoken discourse than on the printed page. ('Perhaps I am being ungenerous'; 'What I mean is that …'; 'My point is that …'; 'I do not mean …'; 'If it sounds like I'm saying … I suppose I am.') These tics can be a bit cloying, and the occasional adolescent turns of phrase feel jarringly regressive: Long Chu uses 'boring' an awful lot; at one point, she introduces a particularly unimpressive quote with 'The following is an actual sentence.' Sign up to Bookmarks Discover new books and learn more about your favourite authors with our expert reviews, interviews and news stories. Literary delights delivered direct to you after newsletter promotion In a postscript to one of the greener pieces in this volume, Long Chu, who is in her early 30s, winces at the prose style deployed by her younger self – 'that kind of bloggy 'voiceyness' was dated even then'. Her anxiety on this score is symptomatic of a generational dilemma for a cohort of American writers who, having been raised to distrust authority – not just as a concept but perhaps especially as a register – and steeped in the highly self-conscious patter of online communities, must now work out how to be publicly clever in a non-overbearing way. In an anti-intellectual media landscape, one way to make yourself legible is to make yourself small. This is the striking thing about Long Chu's authorial tone: she combines the expert and the naif in a single voice, which chimes with a similar dualism in her reader. These essays are essentially journeys – knotty and meandering, with moments of pithy, clarifying insight. If you can hold someone's interest while figuring things out for yourself in real time on the page, you're doing something right. Perhaps the true source of authority is companionable intelligence, and what we think of as sound judgment is just a function of familiarity – comfort in another person's psychic skin. Authority: Essays on Being Right by Andrea Long Chu is published by Hutchinson Heinemann (£20). To support the Guardian, order your copy at Delivery charges may apply.
