How Writing Competitions Are Dealing With AI-Generated Stories

Writing contests around the world are now grappling with a new problem: how to handle artificial intelligence. As AI tools become better at writing, contest organizers have to figure out how to keep their awards meaningful while accepting that technology has changed the creative landscape.

How Competitions Are Checking for AI

The Next Generation Short Story Awards is using AI detection software to block entries that contain AI-generated content, along with traditional plagiarism checkers that scan for copied text. Think of it like a security checkpoint with two guards: one trained to spot when AI has written something, and one trained to spot when a human has copied from somewhere else.

The Queen's Commonwealth Writing Competition has chosen a different path. They don't allow submissions that reveal the real names or personal details of living people, partly because they're concerned about AI being used to create fake or misleading stories about real individuals.

What the Rules Actually Say

Contest organizers are now writing clearer rules about where AI fits in the writing process. The Next Generation Short Story Awards allows writers to use AI for brainstorming and research, but not to generate the actual story. In other words: you can use it to gather ideas, but the words on the page need to be yours.

Similarly, academic writing organizations are working out their own policies. The College Composition and Communication group has released new guidelines about generative AI because the technology is now a real part of how people write.

The Problem With Detection Tools

Here's where things get complicated. AI detection software isn't perfect. Sometimes it flags human-written work as AI-generated, and sometimes it misses actual AI text. This creates headaches for contest organizers: they have to handle appeals from writers who say they were wrongly flagged, and they need processes to double-check the software's conclusions.

There's also a deeper problem. As detection tools get smarter, people get better at making AI-generated text sound more human. It's like a game of cat and mouse: each side keeps improving, and contest administrators have to keep updating their systems.

Who Can Actually Do This

Not all writing competitions have the same resources. Large, well-funded contests can afford expensive detection software and staff to review borderline cases. Smaller, grassroots competitions may not have that budget, so they might rely on basic checks or simply trust that writers are being honest.

This creates an uneven playing field. A big, established contest might catch AI-generated work, while a smaller one might not—which raises questions about what a "fair" competition actually looks like anymore.

What This Moment Looks Like

I've been covering technology for over 30 years, and we've been through similar moments before. When word processors became standard, when internet submissions replaced printed manuscripts, when plagiarism detection software first arrived—each time, creative organizations had to adapt. They figured it out then, and they're figuring it out now, though the answers are still taking shape.

The Queen's Commonwealth Essay Competition's announcement of 'Common Ground, Better Together' as its 2027 theme shows that literary organizations still believe in the value of human creativity, even as the tools around writing change.

What Comes Next

Contest organizers are still in the early stages of working all this out. The policies they're putting in place now will probably change as AI gets better and as organizations learn what works and what doesn't. The real question is whether competitions can keep their core purpose—celebrating human writing—while adapting to a world where AI is part of the toolkit.