This is so fucked. If an author feels they must use AI, then the onus is on them to check that the facts *the author appears to be writing* are actually true. Publishers need to get a grip and see the wood for the trees.
Publisher in this piece says “If an author has used AI to help support their research for a nonfiction book, that’s fine. But… that means that we now need together to apply another layer of human research to make sure that the facts are actually true.” So it’s not fine really, is it?