Creative Liberty or Liability?
Privacy in modern times is a fading concept. With our phones tracking our searches and location, targeted advertising becoming a norm, anything ever considered ‘private’ is certainly floating somewhere in the public domain. As Artificial Intelligence becomes the showstopper of the Digital world, there is a new problem that has cropped up with it. Somehow, some brands are living under the impression that using AI generated ad campaigns involving celebrities without their consent is ‘okay’. WHAT WENT WRONG? TREAD WITH CAUTION
When we asked ChatGPT guidelines for use of celebs in GenAI-led ads’ - it produced this result –
‘When it comes to using AI in ad campaigns involving celebrities, obtaining informed consent is crucial. Obtaining informed consent from celebrities in AI ad campaigns requires transparent communication, detailed explanations, and collaborative decision-making. Respecting the rights and concerns of celebrities is essential in fostering a responsible and ethical approach to AI usage in advertising - (ChatGPT, accessed on ‘AI Appreciation Day’, July 16, 2023).
If only Zomtao and upGrad had sought guidance from ‘Artificial Intelligence (AI) on how to use Artificial Intelligence’ for their ads featuring celebrities, they would have been spared the public backlash on social media. The brands’ recent campaigns featuring AI-generated likelinesses of Elon Musk, Lionel Messi, Leonardo Di Caprio and Google and Alphabet CEO, Sundar Pichai drew flak for violation of ethical standards and breach of privacy. Unfortunately, this stunt seems akin to the use of AI to generate explicit content, in both cases public figures are exploited in various degrees. This realisation must set in, before Generative AI turns into a nightmare at the hands of unscrupulous interests.
While upGrad, known for its tongue-in-cheek humour, may deserve the benefit of doubt as a relative new-comer in the field, Zomato on the other hand is an experienced player. The latter used deepfake and AI tech for its hyperlocalised ad campaign with Hrithik Roshan in July last year. But human creativity can be smug, and public opinion, often whimsical. While Zomato received a mixed reaction with many users joining the conversation with their own memes and suggestions, upGrad mostly faced criticism. However, both the brands took down their ads eventually; upGrad after attempting a brief disclaimer. Released around the same time, media brand Aaj Tak’s campaign featuring AI-generated lookalikes of world leaders – American President Joe Biden, Australian PM Anthony Albanese, Italian PM Giorgia Meloni, Canadian PM Justin Trudeau, Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Indian PM Narendra Modi, practicing Yoga, was also hailed initially.
While ASCI has, as yet, no guidelines delimiting the use of AI in advertising, speaking to IMPACT, Kapoor clarifies, “From a purely consumer protection point of view, what matters is that the ad should not be misleading in any way, whether it’s hand-drawn or AI-generated. AI is another very interesting and exciting new tech, but the intent of the ad and what it conveys is what concerns us. There are certainly other copyright-related implications which are a different set of issues.”
There’s no denying that every new technology must be deployed responsibly, but AI is still at a very nascent stage and evolving. There’s going to be some degree of experimentation as brands familiarise themselves with it and figure out the possibilities and pitfalls. Whether or not ASCI will evolve an AI-specific set of guidelines, will depend on how things shape up, but at this point of time, says Kapoor, “the kind of use cases that we are seeing, are well covered even under our current guidelines. So we have no reason to look into it differently. Going ahead there could be other issues such as unfair competition or plagiarism that might create the need for such an intervention. The ASCI guidelines aimed at countering Dark Patterns in the Digital landscape were, for instance, framed after certain years of UI/UX development.”
It is rather telling that savvy netizens who enjoy and create those memes with random attributions to famous personalities called out these ads for ethical violations. One wonders if it was simply the inherent, subconscious bias against the ‘job-snatcher AI’! But there’s more.
Until the ethical usage of AI in advertising gets formalised, there will always be a grey area. Ashit Chakravarty, Managing Partner - Dentsu Creative West says, “Whatever we see right now is only because of the lack of copyright laws around the use of memes and other such forms of content, not because it’s ethical. Ultimately, a brand can’t use the face or voice of a celebrity without formally onboarding them. This accounts for non-consensual use, because it’s the virtual identity of the person. In fact, this argument is the basis of the current Hollywood debate over how actors will get paid for the work done by their digital doubles. It’s a recognisable face after all, and you can’t use it for your benefit, without their permission.”
Speaking of payment, a basic factor to consider here is that the use of celebrities for brand promotion has historically been done in exchange for a fee. Without their consent, brands are bypassing this transaction. At its core, it is an unethical practice at various levels.
According to Praful Akali, Founder and MD, Medulla Communications both the ads had copyright issues in addition to being unethical. “Essentially, AI does not create anything new. It just compiles the information that is available online, and so, the biggest concern for advertising agencies using AI should be copyright. Even if you have licensed that particular AI tool, the creative it generates is not available for anyone to use as an advertisement. Brands cannot use the work of AI without further refinement or human validation.”
“There are practical reasons for why the meme culture exists. Brands want to be a part of those conversations happening right at that moment, and with AI they can do it even more effectively and quickly. Much of our content is being generated through Midjourney, with a lot of retouching and reiterations happening. It has helped us in increasing our output, and moreover, it makes sense to use these tools for the Digital medium where the content life span is not more than 5-10 seconds, before you scroll once more. There’s no point in spending hours on it. Our AI Studio offers end-to-end AI generated social content to all types of clients/brands, including those with budget constraints who can’t afford content that is perfected by humans. But, this is certainly not the best approach for mainline communication/TVCs due to the obvious ethical and copyright issues, as well as the challenges around the accuracy of AI at present,” states Bagai.
Pillai reckons that because there are no governing laws for the use of AI in advertising, brands and agencies can self-regulate by creating their own ethical framework. Staying informed and contextually relevant is also important. “Staying informed is another very important element so that one doesn’t fall in any trap. When we employ our AdTech platform Channel Factory to help brands optimise their YouTube ads, one of the things we tell brand owners is to get aligned to content that compliments/enhances their own brand values and not look at YouTube content in general. Similarly, the agencies and brand owners employing AI, must ensure the content they generate is contextually relevant and aligned to their own brand values.”
Viral Pandya, Partner & Creative Culture Officer, Cog Culture, agrees. He says, “Generative Artificial Intelligence is a minefield when it comes to intellectual property rights. It doesn’t simply conjure texts and images from thin air, but uses millions, perhaps billions, of existing material to create something that appears new. It’s entirely derivative, though it’s not simple or easy to trace the source materials. As the technology is relatively new, there are no clear laws regarding its use yet, but be certain that they will come. Already there are lawsuits in the US about its use. Brands and agencies should be wary of the legal issues, even the ones that may happen in future. Better still, the industry should evolve its own set of guidelines.”
For MVS Murthy, Chief Marketing Officer at Federal Bank the discussion around AI is one about creative efficiency and not creative liberty. He believes that with AI, one can almost become a content factory. “Our creative supply chain will definitely get bolstered from a time to deploy and scale perspective. However, one can also end up becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. We all know what happened to the brands that overplayed telecalling, spam mails, etc. In this case, even if we assume that a large play will be in the non 1-1 space, one can’t be spewing. Every fake will get unmasked by smarter and diligent audiences. While it will look as good as it lasts, the unravelling will bring the value of the brand down to insurmountable levels,” he states.
Anand, however, maintains that relying solely on AI for the final output is risky for brands. He warns, “Being original and distinctive is crucial to differentiate your brand from others with similar stories. If you rely solely on AI-generated prompts, you might create content similar to others, ultimately getting lost in the clutter of AI-generated content. Therefore, AI outcomes need to be assisted for efficient and effective results.”
A report by Forbes mentions, “The global artificial intelligence market size is projected to expand at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 37.3% from 2023 to 2030. It is projected to reach $1,811.8 billion by 2030.” Clearly, we are heading towards a promising future of possibilities, but before becoming overzealous in our pursuit of ‘creative content,’ let’s gauge if they are actually creative, or mediocre ideas in the garb of innovation.
Tags : #e4m #Impact #advertising #coverstory #ArtificialIntelligence #AI #adcampaigns #celebrities