시인, 작사가 및 창작 작가

I don't think it would be accepted by the Shakespeare purists.

Seeing how society works, I think there's a high chance for people (especially creatives) to retaliate against AI written content. Additionally, it doesn't take two cents for someone to sense something's fishy with someone's writing. It is understandable that the bar for consumption for medias such as poetry and lyrics are low, but at the same time I do find that a factor why it's low is because of the relatability people have in these. If AI were to write it, the humanity in these pieces will disappear and just fall flat.

Indeed, AI can replicate this field as much as it wants for a quick buck. Once it's found, it's a dead end from there.

you just need to know your rhymes and know how to properly write and I think that AI can probably do that

to make REAL poetry you need feelings and to have feelings you need a brain

Don't forget the fact that humans' feelings play an important role in this field. Even if AI generates art works as good as above the average, which one do you think people would choose to enjoy, AI or human artist?

Most novels, songs, and poems produced are of relatively low quality. The bar for consumption is equally low, and will be lowered further still as time progresses. AI can perform adequately, and adequacy is all producers need. So what if AI can't match a master of the craft? How many true masters are there in the field as it is?

AI is faster and cheaper. High volume produced at a low cost equals profit, especially in the current marketplace. And yes, it is a marketplace. There is nothing seen as holy about human effort in the creative industries.

Robot can't write creatively