C+C

#1 – Some toughts about the Hollywood’s strike

WGA and SAG-AFTRA picket line outside Paramount Studios. Photograph by Chris Long [1].

Currently researching the use of robots and artificial intelligence in performance, and some developments in EUA states have caught my attention. It has been all over the news that the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and Screen Actors Guild and American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) have gone on one of the major strikes since 1988, and is already causing serious disruptions in the Hollywood industry. It caught my attention that the WGA and SAG-AFTRA included AI regulation in their demands.

Both associations have made public their demands on their respective websites and on the WAG website we can read:

Regulate use of artificial intelligence on MBA-covered projects: AI can’t write or rewrite literary material; can’t be used as source material; and MBA-covered material can’t be used to train AI. [2]

Simirlarly, the SAG-AFTRA is also asking for regulated use of performers image:

Performers need the protection of our images and performances to prevent replacement of human performances by artificial intelligence technology. [3]

In the past few years, the film industry has been using advanced CGI technology and artificial intelligence to de-age actors or recreate their image without the actor’s participation. AI technology was used to de-age Robert De Niro in The Irishman (2019), or Harrison Ford in Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023). Actors in both films consented to the use of such technology and were properly credited and compensated. However, this is not always the case. In Star Wars: Rogue One (2016), CGI technology brought Peter Cushing back to life. Disney Studios digitally recreated the character of Grand Moff Tarkin based on Cushing’s performance in the original trilogy. This is certainly a questionable practice from an ethical standpoint. The late actor never agreed to his likeness being used in the film. Even though Disney did legally obtain permission, one can only assume that Peter Cushing would agree with it. Moreover, only Guy Henri appears in the IMDb credit list and Peter Cushing is left out. I do not wish to diminish Guy Henri contribution to the role, but Peter Cushing’s original performance served as a blueprint for Guy Henri to bring the character to life again, so it would have been fair to credit both actors. This is one of the concerns raised by SAG-AFTRA. The union is asking for regulation that prevents studios from recreating or replicating actors’ images, performance and physical attributes without proper recognition and compensation.

The strike is not a celebrity rant about not being paid fairly, but to stop corporate greed and defend the rights of the most vulnerable working in the industry. In order to understand the importance of this strike, it is necessary to understand that the industry not only lives off the work of celebrity actors, directors or very established screenwriters. It makes billions of dollars each year on the back of actors and writers that might not be so well known to the general public. However, it is also crucial to stress that AI is not completely unregulated. The EU [4], US [5] and UK [6] governments are currently working on regulating models for AI, focusing on aspects of data security, transparency and privacy.

The strike draws attention to one of the greatest risks of AI: it enables corporate greed. The idea that artificial intelligence will steal people’s jobs, in my view, is somehow misrepresentative. It should be put differently: how corporations and big businesses want to use artificial intelligence to devaluate people’s skills and professional worth in exchange for mediocre and cheap products and services. I am not completely pessimistic about AI but I am neither optimistic. This technology could be a powerful tool for scientific research and creative work. However, corporations could set a path for AI development that endangers our livehoods, compromises our privacy and social rights. If AI research falls under corporate control, the automatisation of labour would not result in people working less time, but having their skills rendered meaningless, which could also be used to justify precarious salaries and poor working conditions. This is why I find the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes relevant. It raises the debate about the ethics of the use of artificial intelligence and how it affects workers’ rights.

AI is not a threat to human creativity. In fact, artists have shown that they can be quite creative and ingenuous with AI technology to generate intriguing and provocative works of art. Earlier this year, German artist Boris Eldagsen won the prestigious Sony World Photography award with his artwork The Electrician from the series PSEUDOMNISIA [7]. The artist shared all the information and communication he had with the contest jury, including the reasons why he submitted his piece and why he rejected the award. What’s interesting about this project is that the artist wasn’t focusing on demonstrating how AI can imitate photography or create a work of art. He also explains how creating a work of art with AI is quite a complex process that requires as much knowledge, skill and creativity as any other artistic field. His ultimate goal was to test whether an art committee was prepared or could distinguish an AI generated image from photography. As we could see, they weren’t. The contest committee could not recognise AI. This was an interesting project because it is not about the image per se, which I think is actually beautiful and meaningful in its own right, but it was more a provocative gesture to generate a debate.

I see a connection between Boris Eldagsen’s provocative gesture and the demands of the WGA and SAG-AFTRA’s strikes. In both cases there is a call for action to start critically thinking about AI and come up with measures for the use of AI that doesn’t undermine the rights and skills of people, whether that is done with the creation of criteria for an art contest or regulation. We need to create a path for the development of AI, so it can be used for the benefit of people and become a tool that enhances our skills and expands our knowledge. I have more questions than answers regarding AI and is easy to feel pessimistic about and think that this technology should be banned. In my view, the risks seem more obvious than the benefits; however, than doesn’t mean that the benefits cannot outweight the risks. This is why it’s necessary to regulate AI use and development to prevent big corporations to turn it into a tool for profit and cost cutting. This is how AI would undermine humans and destroy the fabric of society and democracy.

I see a connection between Boris Eldagsen’s provocative gesture and the WGA and SAG-AFTRA’s strikes. Whether through the creation of criteria for an art contest or a regulation, both cases call for critical thinking about AI and measures that protect people’s rights. AI must be developed to be a tool that enhances our skills and expands our knowledge, so that it can be used for the benefit of people. I have more questions than answers regarding AI and it is easy to feel pessimistic about it and think that this technology should be banned. In my view, the risks seem more obvious than the benefits; however, that doesn’t imply that the benefits cannot outweigh the risks. Mishandling AI could damage the fabric of society and democracy. Thus, we need to create proper regulation for AI use and development to prevent big corporations from using AI to cut costs and increase profits.

---

[2] https://www.wgacontract2023.org/the-campaign/wga-negotiations-status-as-of-5-1-2023.

[3] https://www.sagaftrastrike.org/why-we-strike

[4]https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence/

[5]https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/ai-bill-of-rights/

[6] https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/artificial-intelligence-development-risks-and-regulation/#heading-12

[7] https://www.eldagsen.com/news/