By Sirius McDonell

Writer/Reporter

As the years go by, generative AI, or Gen AI, has started to become a staple in online spaces. You can ask it to write an essay for you, have it figure out a recipe from ingredients you have on hand or even talk to it as if it were your therapist. Its appeal lies in convenience and how quickly you can access it, with few features locked behind a pricey paywall.

However, with the rise of generative AI come inherent issues. Creatives all over the globe fear being replaced and losing their livelihoods to something that, in my view, cannot create the way a person can. It does not “craft” new art or music with human intention. Instead, it draws on pre-existing work to produce something that resembles what you want. Its purpose is to appeal to what you, the prompter, want.

But this creates a new and unique issue: When generative AI is used by big corporations in popular media pushed out to millions of people, where and when will consumers draw their line of support?

“Anne Rice’s The Vampire Lestat” is the third season of the TV series “Anne Rice’s Interview With the Vampire,” based on books by Anne Rice. After the opening sequence was released earlier this year, some fans questioned whether parts of its visuals used generative AI. This disappointed viewers who love the gothic show.

While AMC posted the opening for free on YouTube, watching the full series requires access to AMC or AMC+. Some fans considered not watching “Anne Rice’s The Vampire Lestat,” while others wanted to watch it to support the actors and the work they put in.

Phantom Siita is a Japanese rock girl group with a retro horror concept. The group frequently uses spooky visuals and horror themes in its music, which often features intricate or romantic lyrics. Fans are generally enthusiastic about each new release, ready to listen to the group’s harmonious vocals and see engaging music videos that highlight its delightfully off-putting aesthetic.

After the group released a video for its song “ホラークイーン,” or “Horror Queen,” some viewers questioned whether generative AI had been used in its visuals. This disappointed some fans, yet the YouTube video has amassed more than 1.3 million views. In the comments, many viewers support the singers without publicly addressing the questions about generative AI.

“The Outlast Trials” is an online multiplayer horror game by Red Barrels. It is popular for its engaging concepts, many of which involve experiments on vulnerable individuals. Players are given tasks and “trials” to complete, which they must “outlast,” hence the game’s name.

While the “Outlast” series is generally praised for its clever writing, unique character designs and frighteningly good characterization, there is one thing many fans speak out about. Red Barrels discloses that AI-based tools may have been used to make some images or posters in the game’s environments. Players can also collect in-game “Propaganda Posters” to earn points toward their final grade. The available information does not establish that those specific collectibles are AI-generated, but the disclosed use of AI artwork still concerns players who would rather see people create it.

At first glance, there may be little in common between “Anne Rice’s The Vampire Lestat,” Phantom Siita’s “Horror Queen” and Red Barrels’ “The Outlast Trials.” But when you take a closer look, questions about generative AI are what tie them together. Companies, regardless of the form of media they create, are beginning to use generative AI for visuals and brief, “blink-and-you’ll-miss-it” details.

If companies use it instead of hiring creatives who could bring their own artistic ideas to a project, it raises concerns about the future of artistic jobs. Additionally, as consumers question where to draw the line on supporting projects associated with AI, a key question emerges: What is the alternative at a time when technology is advancing and companies are implementing generative AI in their work?

By ignoring media that uses generative AI, we can hurt the companies and encourage them to stop using it, but we are also telling them we do not want the products they are making. Is it enough to protest the use of a technological advancement when doing so could harm others who were not involved in the decision to use generative AI?

Ideally, we as consumers could tell companies that we want the shows, music and games without generative AI. Still, big companies only listen to so much. To fight for a future where our media remains human-made by human hands, we may have to pass on shows, music and games to gain shows, music and games free of generative AI.

Even so, by taking this step, we risk withholding support from actors, musicians and voice actors whose work we value, even if generative AI appears in only a small part of a project. Only time will tell how entertainment fares.