Too Long; Didn’t Read (TL; DR)

A Long Article Without a Summary

Here it is, late February of 2026, and I said, “This year, I’ll be more active on Substack.” I even made a plan (not with an actual deadline, but a plan). Like, what do I write about? The things I write? Publishing? Well, the answer seems to be a bit of both, so you’ll be hearing from me a little more often. But no promises.

TL;DR

I didn’t create one of these for this article because I want you to read the entire thing before you comment. So if it is too long for you to read, please don’t comment.

The reason is that the topic of this article came up again yesterday, as it has several times in what has already been a long year.

People are commenting on posts containing links to articles and videos that they have not even watched or read. The comments reveal that they saw the title or topic and immediately formed an opinion before reading or listening to what the author had to say.

You say, “Dude, this has been going on for years.” You’re right, but we are at a delicate time in our country for both politics and religion, but I’m not even going to talk about those (at least not in this article). Because instead, I’m going to talk about publishing, which is where I live every day.

Authors already have a lot of struggles, and there is a lot of insecurity and fear in this business. The rise of AI is adding to the fear. There are common questions that at least two camps answer in different ways, and while the truth likely lands somewhere in the middle, many times neither side is truly listening to the other.

They see an article or video title and jump on it because of what they assume is inside, even if that assumption is not true. Bias fuels assumptions, but these same commenters will explain how they are not biased. But that, in itself, is a problem.

Here are some common topics and the common arguments about reading the article:

· AI will replace human writers, and authorship will no longer be a viable career in five years or less.

Comment: I disagree. I’m not reading an article on this, but I sure as hell will leave a comment.

Or:

I agree. I’m quitting and applying for jobs right now. This person is an expert and clearly knows more than I do.

· AI will replace human editors, and in some ways already has. The job of editor will no longer be a viable career in three to five years.

Comment: I disagree with this too, and I have all the reasons. But I won’t read this article to see who wrote it and what they think. It doesn’t matter, because they are wrong and I am right.

Or:

This person is right, and even though I just got a degree in editing from BYU, I’m giving up. Who would be foolish enough to think this is a viable career in the age of AI?

· Your work is copyrighted upon fixation. You don’t need to buy your own ISBNs or register your copyright. Just use free ones, and don’t bother. It’s an extra $65 you don’t have to spend.

Comment: This is not only wrong, but it can cost you big money. I’m not reading the article, but I disagree.

Or:

I agree. This person is clearly an expert. There’s no reason to seek another opinion.

· You can copyright AI generated work, but only if it has X% of human input.

Comment: I don’t need to read this article. I will just make sure I add that much humanity to my work, and I will be fine.

Or:

You should never use AI in any percentage of your work. It should not be something you can copyright. This is BS

· You don’t need to disclose to Amazon or the Copyright Office whether you used AI to create your work or not. Your work, your choice. It’s none of their business.

Comment: What? Of course, you have to be honest. What if you get caught? Besides, it’s wrong to lie.

Or:

Yeah! It’s none of their business how I write my books. I won’t get caught, and I’m just a small author. No one is going to steal my work, so I’ll never have to sue.

The problem with all of these? The article might have really good information or arguments about either side, and by not reading it, you remain uninformed, and you stay in a bubble of confirmation bias that may not be true. The problem with an article like this one is that because of the topics I added to the list, some people will never read the rest of this post. They’ll stop and argue about their side of the bullet points above without reading on.

So please, keep reading.

Admitting Bias

This is tough, but I have both an illustration and a personal example. In editing a manuscript for a Christian therapist (who shall remain nameless, at least for this article), I encountered a statement at the beginning of the book: “I hope this book reaches Christian and non-Christian parents alike.” But the author has a clear bias, which defines his audience. Yes, non-Christian parents might benefit from the information, but they also might be turned off by the volume of religious content in the material.

So we modified the statement to clarify that the author knows he is biased, and that while others might benefit from reading his work, his clear target is Christian parents.

As an editor who is not a practicing Christian, I come to work with my own bias, which works to his advantage. As a Christian school graduate and a Bible college attendee, I know both the language and the bias we want to approach the work from, but I can illustrate to him the instances where he leans too far into his bias.

When it comes to AI and copyright, I definitely have a bias. With AI, my bias is to use it with caution: AI is a great tool for some things, not great for others, and can positively impact your author career in many ways. I worked with a client who has Parkinson’s and could no longer type. He used AI to help write his manuscript, and I edited it for him at a steep discount to help him get it into the world. I have no problem using AI to help in any part of your writing process.

But when it comes to copyright, I am a literalist, and that’s the way I interpret the “copyright clause” in the Constitution. That said, I am not an attorney. My bias is to help authors do the very best things they can to protect their work under the law, so I consult with experts to help me fulfill that mission (a part of my bias for sure) in as strict a manner as possible under the law, as those experts explain it to me, and I understand it.

If you don’t read or consume anything outside your bias, though, you may struggle to learn and grow. Your bias could be born out of another issue: ignorance.

Admitting, Accepting, and Correcting Ignorance

There is a huge difference between ignorance and a level of intelligence. The level of your intelligence can be improved, to a certain extent, through practice, but we all have a certain mental capacity, and usually for different things. I’m much better with words than math, for example, even though I can do math reasonably well.

Ignorance is not always a choice. Sometimes, it is a circumstance. What it means is that you have the intelligence to comprehend something, reach conclusions when presented with facts (signs of intelligence), but you have one of these reasons for being ignorant:

· You have never been presented with the facts, so you had no opportunity to learn them.

· You have avoided the facts for an emotional or personal reason. (This often happens in religious circles, and even has a name: Spiritual Avoidance)

· You have had an opportunity to learn the facts, and they have been presented to you, but you choose to ignore them anyway. This often happens when you encounter something outside of your usual confirmation bias (which we all create for ourselves, even subconsciously) and you think, “That can’t be true” without carefully examining the facts in front of you.

· Or lastly, you just aren’t that interested. I find string theory fascinating, but I don’t plan to take the time away from the things I really love and learn more about it to remedy my ignorance about it.

The problem is that ignorance is perfectly normal. In the wide breadth of knowledge in today’s world, you can only know so many things and can only be deeply knowledgeable about a few. But there is a shame (some would call it “toxic shame,” but that’s a different article, because we see that in publishing as well) surrounding ignorance.

Rest assured. Everyone you know is ignorant of something. Ignorance is normal, and sometimes it is, indeed, bliss. However, this leads to yet another issue with TL;DR situations. You can be aware of something and even understand it, but that does not mean you are well-versed in it or an expert.

False vs. Genuine Humility

Commenting on an article or video without reading or watching it is saying to the author, “I don’t need to read this. I already know what is in it, and I feel compelled to give you my opinion.” There is only one thing that drives this: pride.

I find that whenever I read an article, even if I disagree with it (like some of the doomsday AI stuff mentioned above), I learn something. This means I erase a tiny bit of ignorance and hopefully bias that I had about the topic before reading or listening. It happens almost without exception. At the very least, I learn something about the author, and often about their bias.

But I have to read those articles to reap those benefits. Because what I understand is that the more I learn, the more I understand how much there is in the world that I don’t know. Because you need a dose of true humility from time to time.

Someone with false humility will phrase it like this: “I still have lots to learn, but in the meantime, let me tell you everything I have learned so far, because my understanding is far superior to yours.”

We had a copyright attorney on our podcast recently, and although I have been in the industry for around two decades now, have worked for big publishing houses in editor and managing editor positions, have owned two publishers, and been published and have self-published multiple times in that period, I learned things in that session about contracts, terms of service, and copyright law.

I know a lot, but experts know more than I do, so I defer to and learn from them, and realize at the end of those conversations that there is so much more that I do not know yet. As an author and a human being, I know you have likely gained areas of expertise (ask me about obscure serial killers or body disposal methods, or how money laundering actually works). But you likely have a lot more to learn.

“I Am an Expert.”

Here’s the final word, because this article is too long already, and my WIP wants these 2.5K words toward the conclusion of that story: I am an expert. So are you. But we are experts in different areas, and there is nothing wrong with that.

For example, I’m an expert in museum operations, but in a very specific niche. I’ve established and ran the research department in a museum, completed the digitization of archives at major universities and state agencies as part of that project, consulted with museums on collection and accession policies, and more. I’m also an expert in the mining history of my state, and to a lesser extent, the history of silver and gold mining in the western United States.

How did I gain that expertise? Through going from the position of a generalist to a specific expertise through both study and practice. I took courses, read books, and then acted on the knowledge I gained in a variety of circumstances.

I’m an expert at publishing and editing. I’m known as the Plot Dude because I not only practice plot through writing, but I actively study story, plot structure, and everything related to that through both college courses and more informal learning (including two master’s level courses on story structure and semiotics just two years ago).

Those are earned expertise: gained through both education and practice. This is much the way other professions work as well. You get a degree (that’s the education part) and then you apply that study through doing the job you trained for. For example:

· My life partner Holly, is a dental hygienist. She obtained her Bachelor of Science degree, completed clinicals (similar to what doctors and nurses do), practiced for over two decades, and continues to take continuing education every year. She is an expert.

· My daughter is finishing nursing school. She is already licensed as an LPN, is getting her BSN and RN this year, has done clinicals as part of her education, and is actively working in healthcare at hospitals and in pediatrics, her chosen specialty.

· Lawyers study and pass the bar, then go into practice.

· Doctors graduate from medical school, and then do clinical rotations under a mentor, then practice for years.

· Editors get a certain amount of education, practice editing, often for publishers, and then, as freelancers, take continuing education constantly.

You get the idea. Here’s the rule: expertise equals education plus practice. If you read a lot of contracts (like I have, and like my business partner Stacey has) and have engaged with copyright law on behalf of editing and publishing clients (which we both have), we are extremely knowledgeable about copyright law, but we are not experts. An expert practices law as well, dealing with clients daily and arguing cases in front of judges in court. Those experts are copyright and IP attorneys. Good attorneys are constantly educating themselves because new case law is emerging all the time, and courts rule, and legislation passes.

They are the experts. There is a difference between understanding something (the cure for ignorance) on a basic level, becoming well-versed and knowledgeable, and being an expert. The only way you reach that expertise is through education and experienced practice. (It’s like watching a commercial on TV that describes your symptoms, researching the drug on Google, and going to your doctor to tell them what medication you need. Good thing that never happens. That would be a nightmare!)

Those experts also have legal protection. They have malpractice and other forms of insurance that protect them because of their expertise. An insurance company does not issue malpractice insurance to someone who is not a doctor or a nurse, so a person who represents themselves as a medical expertise without the correct certification and documentation has no legal protection when it comes to the advice they give, and they cannot legally perform some of the duties of their profession because of the inherent danger of false expertise.

You don’t get true expertise by not reading an article and sharing your knowledge. You don’t get that by commenting on a YouTube video you did not watch, but you read the title and saw the first few minutes (if any), so you already know everything you need to know about what’s inside.

You only learn through openness, humility, and doing your best to set aside bias at least for a moment (that last one is almost impossible). You gain it through the study of reliable sources, and in some cases, through obtaining a degree coupled with rigorous testing of your skills.

So, instead of putting a TL;DR at the top of an article, or summarizing it with AI, then commenting, how about we slow down and read things? Allow yourself to think, feel, and digest the content. Learn from those people who are truly experts in their field.

Then your comments will be much more intelligent and well-received. And you might just be a better person armed with new knowledge. It might even reduce division if we can take the time to understand each other.