Prof Lawrence Muganga, the Vice Chancellor of Victoria University has come under fire after large parts of an opinion piece he wrote for The New Vision was discovered to have been crafted using Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!In addition, the academic was accused of failing to attribute the source of some of his information which some readers pointed out had been “lifted” from various sources.
The lengthy piece titled: “Why Uganda needs a ministry of AI”, sought to make a case about the growing importance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and why the government must give it special attention. It ran in the January 1, 2025 edition.
However, many readers quickly pointed out that with the aid of AI large chunks of the piece had been lifted from other published sources without attribution, a cornerstone in academic writing.
Bernard Sabiti, a digital analyst and consultant, expressed disappointment that someone of Muganga’s academic standing could do such a thing.
He wrote: “I didn’t want to comment before reading the piece. Reading it, I smelt AI’sh language so I did a little check. Now I can no longer comment on the merits of his proposal which is sad. Does The New Vision have a plagiarism checker?”
In reply, Muganga was not remorseful about his action. Instead, he blasted people like Sabiti and others for having a “negative mindset” about AI.
“While I understand that you may feel strongly about your position, it is disheartening to see such a transformative tool of our time being dismissed without a clear understanding of its purpose and potential. Your argument is not only misinformed but also counterproductive at a time when embracing technology is essential for progress,” Muganga wrote.
He said the major purpose of AI is to solve complex problems and improve productivity.
“Think of AI like a tractor in farming. A tractor helps farmers work more efficiently, just as AI enhances human effort in various fields. Would anyone reject a tractor because it performs the same task for multiple farmers? Of course not,” he argued.
Yet like multiple readers commented, the core of the argument was not about using AI but plagiarism and failure to attribute. Muganga did not directly address these concerns.
“…And you didn’t even give credit where it is due. Originality is very key in writing. You literally carried everything from AI to your write up. Shame,” wrote another reader.
When one reader said Muganga had not acknowledged the use of AI in the article, the professor responded: “…this isn’t academic writing or published research… it’s a letter or an opinion!”
Muhereza Kyamutetera, a business journalist, came to Muganga’s rescue.
“Anyone who thinks AI is plagiarism has been left in 2024. That is exactly the reason we need the Ministry of AI,” Kyamutetera wrote.
Using Large Language Models (LLM), AI applications like ChatGPT usually aggregate widely available information and data to generate responses to several prompts from their users.
This has become a point of contention in the West where some academic institutions and content creation organizations have argued that information generated from AI tools like ChatGPT constitutes plagiarism. Some like the New York Times and Washington Post have filed suits against ChatGPT.
Yet whatever the case, AI appears to have come to stay.