For Whose Sake

Who takes the fall when controversy strikes?

I am sort of dialed into a fair bit of the bookish sphere and the steady stream of controversies, and the newest one is the fracas concerning Shy Girl, a horror novel by author Mia Ballard. Originally published independently, the publisher Hachette saw the success and buzz of the novel and acquired it for a traditional release, only to abandon the book as soon as allegations of the use of generative AI were thrown about with some credulity.

This is just the latest bout of book controversies, but this one leaves me feeling stranger than normal. I think it's that a major publisher was involved in things, and I feel like it's really worth interrogating that a bit.

Before we get into the weeds, I feel like I should lay the facts, and my cards, on the table. Just so y’all know where I'm coming from.

• Shy Girl, to me, is not a good book. I’,ve read excerpts and heard snippets, and it really fails to deliver on what it promises. The pacing is erratic and frankly poor, the writing feels overly florid and attempting to “punch above its weight”, and it feels like Ballard is not currently a good enough writer to do the ideas she has justice. That being said, bad books to me can be great books for others, and I feel like the idea of the book is certainly intriguing if executed on well. It got enough buzz to get a traditional publisher to take notice, at least.

• This isn't the first time Mia Ballard has been dogged by AI controversy…or controversy in general. The original cover of Shy Girl was traced back to a painting she didn't have authorization to use, her previous novel Sugar was adorned with a spurious cover, and plenty of Reddit threads exist that speculate on her writing being, if not AI, heavily assisted and abetted by AI tools (Shy Girl, Sugar, and We All Rot Eventually).

• Hachette picked up the novel and released it in the UK last year, where it was a modest success. This all happened rather quickly, especially as far as publishing operates. The book came out initially I'm February 2025 and was out in the UK by November.

• The basis of AI allegations seems to be a mix of machine analysis (copies fed through algorithms meant to detect AI hallmarks came back that it was likely assisted by AI) and reader intuition (the writing is littered with hallmarks of AI model writing, like its predilection towards similes, triplets, and a lack of real emotional beats). This wasn't a book that had an AI prompt inadvertently left in the text (like we’ve seen in the past), so there's no hard evidence.

So, we went from “buzzy horror novel that piqued BookTok’s interest” to “disgraced purveyor of AI ‘slop’” in just over a year. Ironically, being picked up by traditional publishing may well have done Ballard in here, since it could have kept a mystique as a cult-favorite horror novel that wasn't for everyone.

Ballard’s defense is that she asked a friend to edit the novel, and that while she didn't make use of AI tools, this friend apparently did. The explanation is possible, but I don't find it credulous, because the implication is that her friend ran it through and she didn't evaluate it any further or get another pair of eyes over it.

That being said, the biggest issue I find myself having isn't with the author, but with the publisher. I think Hachette deserves way more shit than Ballard does here.

Hachette has pretty much used the “bitch set me up” defense. That is, they were bamboozled by the writer and would never have done anything like this.

I am not so sure about that.

The trend for self-published books making the leap to traditional publishing isn't common, but it happens enough to notice. If a book is buzzy enough and has enough going on, they'll look to capitalize on it themselves.

Publishing is very risk-averse. If there's a trend that's selling books and moving markets, they'll throw themselves onto it with reckless abandon. The crush of paranormal romance books in the wake of Twilight and the flood of dystopian young-adult literature following The Hunger Games attests to that, the “follow the leader” mindset. And those are old examples!

Hachette saw a book with buzz and did pretty much zero diligence. They saw it had buzz, they saw it was selling, and they wanted a slice of the pie. I certainly won't fault Ballard for taking up their offer.

Again, though, she's a writer who's had that lingering specter for a bit. Both of her previous works had allegations of “AI slop” around them. True or not, Hachette not doing it's due diligence seems to be a decision borne out of greed and incompetence, and they definitely need to be called out for their role, being fine with a book that had a lot of question marks around it until they saw those profits disappear before their eyes.

Unfortunately, I don't think Mia Ballard will be the last case of this. As I mentioned, publishing will gladly jump on a trend if there's money in it, and a buzzy horror book will certainly present the chance for money.

Honestly, everyone is responsible here. I get that it's hard to be a creative on a tight budget, and I can't fault Ballard for turning to sketchy help, but I can fault her for not going back through and noticing potential issues or having another pair of eyes say “hey, Mia, this feels off”. Hachette completely dropped the ball as well, both in acquiring it purely off of buzz and then seemingly not going through it themselves to revise things. (Apparently, the UK edition of Shy Girl also flagged the software that is meant to detect AI.)

If you're going to be angry at anyone, be angry at the publisher here. Mia Ballard isn't faultless at all, but it's not like Hachette didn't know exactly what they were acquiring when they picked it up.