Book tracking app Fable will remove its popular AI features after the platform generated some reader summaries that were offensive to race, gender, sexuality and disability.
Fable’s annual reading summaries – similar in style to Spotify Wrapped – are intended to be a “playful, fun way” to celebrate readers’ “uniqueness,” said Chris Gallello, head of product, in a video posted to social media.
Tiana Trammell was among those who got a controversial summary. When she unwrapped her annual synopsis, she found a summary that suggested she, a Black reader, prioritize white authors more.
“Your journey dives deep into the heart of Black narratives and transformative tales, leaving mainstream stories gasping for air. Don’t forget to surface for the occasional white author, okay?” the summary reads.
Other users have posted their Fable reader summaries that said the disability narratives they read “could earn an eye-roll from a sloth” and disparaging rom-com reads as setting “the bar for my cringe-meter.”
Check out: USA TODAY’s weekly Best-selling Booklist
Writer Danny B. Groves’ summary called him a “Diversity Devotee” then continued, “Your bookshelf is a vibrant kaleidoscope of voices and experiences, making me wonder if you’re ever in the mood for a straight, cis white man’s perspective!”
The comment was disorienting for Groves. He felt pride for his dedicated effort to diverse reading, but also reminiscent of the years he spent not reading because he couldn’t find books that represented him as a Black, gay man.
“You wouldn’t expect to see that sort of line on someone’s readership that does not read diversly,” he tells USA TODAY. “They wouldn’t say ‘Are you ever in the mood for a gay, trans, Black woman’s perspective?’”
Fable apologizes after ‘very bigoted’ reader summaries, blames AI
In the first of two videos posted to Fable’s account, Gallello noted some changes to AI disclosure and opt-outs, saying the “very bigoted” reader summaries were a shock to the Fable team. Fable’s use of AI was not meant to be a “surprise or deceptive,” to users, Gallello said.
Gallello said the company had implemented safeguards and an offensive language filter: “Clearly in both cases, that failed this time around,” he said. “So I think as a company, we kind of underestimated how much work needs to be done to make sure that these AI models … are doing this in a responsible, safe way.”
In a statement to USA TODAY, Kimberly Marsh Allee, Fable’s head of community, said changes are imminent:
“This week, we discovered that two of our community members received AI generated reader summaries that are completely unacceptable to us as a company and do not reflect our values. We take full ownership for this mistake and are deeply sorry that this happened at all. We have heard feedback from enough members of our community on the use of generative AI for certain features that we have made the decision to remove these features from our platform effective immediately. Users should see those changes reflected in the coming days.”
Trammell told USA TODAY she didn’t have a problem with Fable’s AI summaries before this summary. One she received in December made her feel seen as a reader: “Your bookshelf radiates with a quest for joy, justice, and the power of personal journeys.” But she believes more internal testing should be done to make sure this doesn’t happen again.
For other users, the use of AI was the sticking point.
“I think it’s a massive disservice to rely heavily on AI,” one Instagram user commented. “Especially with the readership community since a lot of us think it’s harmful for the entire reading experience all the way from authors, editors, readers and general community members.”
Groves agrees: “I recognize that Fable is a small team, and as a result of that … they’re likely unable to keep up with a review of every individual’s reader summary. But if that’s the case, then there shouldn’t be an AI algorithm that’s immediately pushing out content or generating an output that can create harm.”
In a second video, posted Friday evening, Fable said it would remove three key features that utilize AI.
“Having a feature that does any sort of harm in the community is unacceptable,” Gallello said.
Some users consider leaving Fable after AI blunder
A popular alternative to Goodreads, Fable is beloved for its social function that allows readers to join book clubs and chat candidly about titles. Because of the unique community feature, Groves says he will be staying on Fable but will prioritize other apps like Storygraph.
“I’m willing to sacrifice a reader summary until there’s a team in place that can better moderate the outputs from this AI system,” he says.
Across social media, some users have shared their desire to abandon the app altogether.
At the time of publication, Trammell says she’s been disappointed with the email responses she’s received from Fable, which cited the apology video and only happened after her post gained traction. She deactivated her account after the first video went live.
“I don’t desire to restore a relationship with the app at this point,” Trammell said. “But for people who are opting to stay on the site and people who in the future may sign up, they don’t need to be subjected to that and it’s their responsibility as a company to ensure that doesn’t happen.”
Groves also hopes to see Fable use the incident as a catalyst to highlight diverse reading.
“(If) your platform has become a place where people have experienced harm and as a result of that, people are fleeing because they don’t want to experience harm again, then maybe take a risk and tailor your focus, your interests and your platform to center more of those diverse stories,” Groves says.
This story has been updated with additional information.
15 books we can’t wait to read:Most anticipated releases of 2025
Clare Mulroy is USA TODAY’s Books Reporter, where she covers buzzy releases, chats with authors and dives into the culture of reading. Find her on Instagram, check out her recent articles or tell her what you’re reading at cmulroy@usatoday.com.
