Hollywood, Are You "Team Human" Or "Team AI"? It's Time To Choose
The WGA Strike is a Test Case for the Studios (& the Choice Must Be Made Now, Before its AI-Generated)
The WGA strike hangs over all of Hollywood and the entire creative community. But as I wrote last week, one issue almost quietly towers above it all - artificial intelligence. AI represents a direct existential threat to writers, as well as to all Creatives, and it’s time right now to make the single fundamental choice that will determine our industry’s path forward, yes, forever. Here it is: Are we, as an industry, “Team Human” or “Team AI”? That question isn’t meant to be alarmist, anti-tech or overly simplistic. It’s our collective reality due to AI’s endlessly accelerating sophistication in a world that unleashed ChatGPT less than six months ago.
I’ve continuously raised the red warning flag about AI in my weekly columns since that time. But I’ve also tried to stay sober through it all to point out AI’s positive impacts - examples of how artists can harness AI and its immense power to serve as a revolutionary new tool for their benefit. Schizophrenic? Not at all. Different contexts lead to different conclusions. Creators with fandom are positioned well (like musician Grimes), but those behind the scenes (like Hollywood writers) are not. Where we place the “human” in the equation drives all of it, and we can’t wait for time to pass to answer that question.
With that prologue in mind, here is my “Three Act” Hollywood litmus test to guide every Hollywood decision – including resolution of the writers’ strike - along this exciting, yet daunting, AI journey.
Act I: We, as an industry, must choose whether we are (or are not) “Team Human” and believe that human creativity is divine - that true creativity, as in originality and inspiration, is unattainable by artificial intelligence acting alone. “Team Human” compels us to resist the urge to cede superiority of imagination to the providence of machines. No offense to the tech world (in which I’ve spent my career). But it is “Artificial” intelligence after all. That means it is “artificial” creativity.
We as a society have been trained to feel insecure about our place in the world next to ever-increasingly sophisticated productivity-prioritizing machines. Perhaps instead we flip the script and celebrate the fact that human minds fire in mystical and frequently unfathomable non-predictive ways. To err is human, right? And that “human” quality – that non-replicable “weirdness” (as The New York Times’ Ezra Klein would say) – is precisely what opens the door to new possibilities.
AI, on the other hand, is powered by predictive models that inevitably risk pushing creative works to the banal in its mission of constant iteration and regeneration of existing works. That method works exceedingly well in the world of objective scientific endeavors (e.g., curing cancer), but not so much in the subjective, frequently inexplicable world of the arts and creativity. As an example, yes, AI could write this article in my style. But no, it can’t predict precisely which precise sentence I will choose next (because I just changed it).
Act II: If we choose to be on “Team Human,” then we must be absolute and unwavering in our commitment to keep humans at the center of the creative and entertainment universe. If we don’t make that choice now, AI inevitably will. The “Godfather of AI,” Geoffrey Hinton, just left Google precisely to sound this alarm.
This doesn’t mean we reject AI. In fact, the recently launched Human Artistry Campaign’s first principle (out of seven) is that “technology has long empowered human expression, and AI will be no different.” We are realists, pragmatists. We understand that the world in which we create is forever transformed.
But we also believe AI is here to empower our creative endeavors, not overtake them. AI expands the artist’s palette and canvas of possibilities. AI also democratizes art, much like synthesizers democratized music four decades ago. Synths empowered humans with creative ideas – but no formal music training – to bring those ideas to life. Hence a whole new era of 1980’s New Wave. But we called these new “synthetic” sound-producing instruments “synthesizers” for a reason.
Act III: If we accept the fact that AI’s threat to the creative community is real, then we must back up our commitments with real actions, real teeth, right now. That means we define our incentive structures, our commitments and rewards, and the overall rules of the game accordingly. Our legal and business framework and guardrails must reflect this “Team Human” truism.
The U.S. Copyright office has made its choice to embrace “Team Human,” a least for now. It recently reiterated its policy to reject copyright protection for works “without any creative input or intervention from a human author.” This is a big deal. The government’s choice to require humanity in the equation lessens commercial incentives to create purely AI-generated works, because no single person can claim to be the ”originator” who deserves a monopoly to monetize them. AI-only generative art is for us all immediately – in the public domain - which is something for studio chiefs to keep in mind.
Taking these “Three Acts” together and applying them to Hollywood’s writers’ strike, how the studios choose to respond to the “AI threat” on fundamental issues of payment, credit, and overall inclusion reflects a choice about on which team to play. If that choice is “Team Human” - and AI is treated as being an exciting new tool to support writers in their craft – then the right answer is simple. The priority position of writers must be locked in.
At a minimum, Team Human calls for Hollywood to respect the writers’ position for at least six months (akin to the recent tech luminaries’ call to arms) and revisit the “AIvolution” that takes place during that period. Why would the studios embrace anything else? After all, ultimately, “Team Human” saves everyone in the Hollywood, including the executives who call the shots. If they want to play the “long game” for their jobs, it’s the only answer.
[My media, entertainment and tech legal and business advisory firm Creative Media and I work with leading companies and players in these worlds, including deeply in AI (check out our clients). Think of us as your external General Counsel, business development experts and advisors. Reach out to me, Peter Csathy, at peter@creativemedia.biz to explore how we can help.]