A open letter imploring publishers to restrict their use of AI-generated artwork was posted online by activist, writer and artist Molly Crabapple and the Center for Artistic Inquiry and Reporting.
The main supporters of the letter are publishers, journalists, authors, artists, cartoonists and illustrators around the world. Some notable names include author Naomi Klein, MSNBC political commentator Chris Hayes, playwright V (formerly Eve Ensler), and journalists Rula Jebreal and Spencer Ackerman.
The letter has nearly 1,000 signatures at the time of writing and its authors have invited members of the public to add their names to the list.
“Since the earliest days of print journalism, illustration has been used to elucidate and add perspective to stories,” the letter begins. “Illustrator’s art is always about something that’s not just intimately tied to current events, but inherently human about the story itself.”
The letter goes on to make a stark claim that this special relationship between the human writer and the human illustrator is “in danger of extinction.”
Citing the low cost and high speed of generative AI tools, the authors predict that without intervention, their widespread availability could mean that “only a small elite of artists can stay in business, their work selling as a kind of symbol of luxury status”.
“This letter is an effort to shape critical debate about the future of our newsrooms,” Mazria Katz, executive director of the Center for Artistic Inquiry and Reporting, said in a press release. “There is a narrative that this technology is unstoppable. It is not true. We have a choice whether or not to use these products.
The letter also raises the issue of training datasets containing copyrighted images taken from the Internet without an artist’s knowledge or consent. He calls on newsrooms to take a stand against “corporate theft” and to protect intellectual property rights.
“AI art companies are on the verge of destroying illustrators’ livelihoods,” Crabapple said in a statement, “and they’re using illustrators’ own stolen images to do it.”
Julien van Dieken, A girl with shiny earrings. Courtesy of the artist.
Since the release of DALL-E 2 sent AI-generated art viral last year, several companies have encountered backlash for experimenting with the new tools, including the Mauritshuis museum in the Netherlands for an AI-generated version of Vermeer A girl with an earring, netflix for using AI to help illustrate an anime short, the San Francisco Ballet to redeem the AI-generated promo. Just two weeks ago, an AI-generated entry won the top prize at the prestigious Sony World Photography Awards 2023.
“[A.I.] only creates ersatz versions of illustrations with no real insight, wit or originality,” the open letter continues. “Generative AI art is vampiric, feasting on past generations of artwork even as it sucks the blood of living artists. Over time, this will impoverish our visual culture.
“Consumers will be trained to accept this art that looks like art, but the ingenuity, the personal vision, the individual sensibility, the humanity will be missing.”
Follow Artnet News on Facebook:
Want to stay one step ahead of the art world? Subscribe to our newsletter to receive breaking news, revealing interviews and incisive reviews that move the conversation forward.
