Attention all crime novel enthusiasts! Freida McFadden has recently revealed her true identity… in part due to rumours that she was using AI.
In case you missed it, Freida McFadden is a hugely successful American author who specialises in psychological thriller and crime writing. Having published 35 books since 2015, McFadden’s identity has been a topic of speculation for quite some time. Until recently, her website simply stated that she was a practicing doctor who specialises in brain disorders. With no book tours, signings or author events, rumours began to swirl. Freida McFadden isn’t real. Freida McFadden is actually a group of three men. And by far the most common one – Freida McFadden is using generative AI.
The basis for these rumours is honestly laughable. Some of the explanations I have come across include boring, unimaginative plotlines (I strongly disagree), and the idea that no full time doctor could possibly have time to publish such a volume of novels at regular intervals. In terms of the latter, given that in November 2025 there were 9.3 million Americans working multiple jobs to afford basic living costs, this scenario is not as out of the realms as people may think.
Another reason given is the use of a pen name. According to some, by not using her real name, McFadden is confirming to the masses that she isn’t a real person. This argument doesn’t make a whole lot of sense: authors have been using pen names for centuries, with a notable example being the Brönte sisters. They all wrote under pen names: Currer (Charlotte), Ellis (Emily) and Acton (Anne) Bell. The reason for this was two-fold. Not only were they able to ensure their privacy, writing under a pen name provided them the freedom to write about taboo issues in Victorian society which were not acceptable for women to discuss. This is a concept that has continued into the present day, with Erika Mitchell (known professionally as EL James) opting to use a pen name due to the explicit nature of her work. Sound familiar? Pen names are used by authors for a variety of reasons, with McFadden opting to do so for privacy. She did not want her medical career to be impacted by her writing, and so chose to write under a different name.
So how did AI come into the conversation? Combined with the use of a pen name, the lack of book tours and signings fuelled the accusations. How could McFadden possibly be real if she never appeared in public? It’s difficult to understand why this view is limited to McFadden, who is not the only author to shy away from the spotlight. The Secret Barrister is another notable anonymous author whose identity remains a secret to this day. It is curious that AI accusations are not being levelled towards this anonymous author, who has a strikingly similar background to McFadden: a full time job outside the writing profession, a pen name and no desire to be in the public eye. Yet still, the AI accusations continued to be levelled towards McFadden, despite the fact that the majority of her novels were written before AI use became mainstream in 2023.
Although AI has exploded in recent years, it is not something that is favoured by everyone. 2026 research published by the UK government found that 73% of the general public used AI in daily life over the period of a month. However, only around 33% of this is made up of novelists using AI during the writing process (though really, is it a writing process if you use AI?). For many writers, AI has not, nor will it ever be a part of the process. More recently, there has been a wider outcry by the arts industry about the pervasive use of AI in replacement of creativity, with some artists such as Paris Paloma using their platforms to speak out against its use. Hayo Miyazaki (the founder of Studio Ghibli) has been extremely vocal, stating that AI use in art is “an insult to life itself”. The argument is the same across the board: no amount of computer generated ‘slop’ – to use the term that has become synonymous with AI – will replace the time, effort and emotion that comes from human art.
Yet the use of AI is not slowing down. Cambridge University found that a little over half of currently published authors are concerned that AI will replace fiction writers. More concerning was the discovery that nearly two thirds of authors know that their work has been used to train AI Large Language Models or LLMs without their permission, much less payment. The fact that it has become so commonplace to take other’s work without permission – to effect stealing – speaks to a wider issue that AI has created. Because AI is not a physical person, it seems to be above the law. If a human stole an author’s work, they would be punished. When AI does it, there are no consequences.
Another issue with the normalisation of AI is its ability to remove anonymity from the arts. If someone does not wish to be in the public eye, they aren’t real. And if they aren’t real, they must be computer generated. How far will this go? Will society start accusing other writers, songwriters, artists of being AI simply because they choose to remain out of the spotlight? Not only does this take away people’s right to choose how to live their life, it could also quell discussions about controversial topics. The assumption that writing decisions such as the use of a pen name constitutes proof of a fake, non-existent individual, rather than someone who wishes to express their views without judgement just like the Brönte sisters did in times gone by is not reflective of artistic expression. Rather, it is a prison created and upheld by the walls of artificial intelligence.
So what have we learnt from the Freida McFadden controversy? Her identity reveal doesn’t actually change that much – she is still a crime and psychological thriller enthusiast from New York; a practicing doctor with a talent for plot twists. But it does spark a wider conversation about the impact AI is having on the creative industry as a whole. With AI being so deeply ingrained into society, it is becoming increasingly difficult to work out what is real and what is not. It is unclear what its use will do to the future of anonymity in the arts and how this can be managed. But one thing is certain – nothing will ever replace the work of a human being.