MAKE IT FAIR: AI IN THE CREATIVE INDUSTRIES
Last month saw creative industries of all origins unite in common cause under a singular topical headline: “MAKE IT FAIR”. Journalists, publishers, artists, filmmakers, and pretty much anyone who makes a living off copyrighted work, have banded together against the government’s proposal to allow its use in AI generated content without fair payment to its creators.
Essentially, the new law would place the onus on creatives to opt out of allowing AI training models to use their work, but the UK government does not currently have a proposed framework for how to remunerate rights holders who have not explicitly withdrawn permission. While they have assured that they would not introduce such measures without proper standards and requirements in effect, what concerns me is how this could potentially affect a sector that is already struggling in the current economic climate.
Despite the government’s claims that it recognises the creative industries to be of fundamental importance to the UK economy, the last decade of educational policies directly dispute this. The Chancellor of the Exchequer in 2016 pledged over £23 billion in support of STEM subjects, with funding for the arts overlooked in typical fashion. In 2023, Rishi Sunak started a war on “low value” degrees, operating under the blanket assumption that lower paying graduate roles, like those in creative, were of less value and therefore relevant degrees are unnecessary. While it’s true that few creative roles require a degree, these courses still provide invaluable teaching and networking opportunities that young artists may struggle to start their careers without.
Even now, under a Labour government that promises to increase employment opportunities in this area, it is evident that those in power value copyright over creativity. They relish the revenue that these industries bring in, but they don’t care to see that the hard-working talent behind it is supported through this uncertain time. This topic is intrinsically linked to another issue that is currently holding the sector back: the ever-widening class gap. Unpaid internships, unstable income, lack of networking and affordable training opportunities, and the tendency for these businesses to cluster in parts of the country with the highest cost of living are just a few of the barriers preventing working class people from considering the arts as a viable career.
If creatives, freelancers especially, cannot be assured that they will be fairly paid for their work, this sector and its revenue will continue to suffer. We are already seeing the dilution of creative roles, with companies expecting a designer/copywriter/video editor/marketing strategist all-in-one hire, dismissing the years of dedication it takes to master just one of these skills and making it even harder for candidates to compete in this wild job market. And now with AI on the scene, the government will facilitate the replacement companies hope will cut costs – by a robot spouting stolen labour, no less!
I want to make it clear that I am not anti-AI. I believe that when used ethically, it is a fantastic tool that can enhance and inspire. But I think author Joanna Maciejewska’s brilliant viral tweet holds up in a startlingly poignant way: “I want AI to do my laundry and dishes so that I can do art and writing, not for AI to do my art and writing so that I can do my laundry and dishes.”
That’s not to say it should be removed as a creative instrument altogether, but it MUST be removed as an alternative to accomplished artists if there is to be a shred of humanity left in what is first and foremost a human discipline. For those of us who aren’t nepo babies, entering the arts as a profession requires sacrifice, resilience and hard work – and even then, success is not guaranteed. So, if the Labour Party truly wants to generate growth and longevity in the creative industries, then they should focus on building more achievable in-roads for young people and collaborating with businesses to provide accessible training opportunities to address the skills shortages. But instead, all they care about is generating a higher GDP by getting content out there as quickly and cheaply as possible, creatives be damned if it leaves them out of a job.
Whether you agree with my stance or not, it is surely justified to state that creatives deserve to be imbursed for their efforts, regardless of whether they have a say in how it is put to use. If this is something you also feel passionate about, I would urge you to use the link below on the News Media UK website to send an email to your MP. It’s an automated draft that takes less than a minute to send, and the more people speak up about this issue, the more the government will be forced to do something about it.
I hope that this campaign will prompt those who have the power to make decisions to see the value in hiring a real person with unique ideas and hard-earned talent over a copycat machine.
Write to your MP here: https://newsmediauk.org/make-it-fair/
References
