Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
A hill I’d like to die on: I don’t consider content created entirely by an AI-powered photo or video creator to be “art.”
This rule — made by me, for me — took up a significant portion of my mind space in 2025. Over the course of the year, we went from hackneyed, hallucinogenic AI videos to clips that were virtually indistinguishable from the real thing. This year may seem like forever, but the pace of AI video improvement over the past seven months has truly been feverish. The same applies to image generation – Google Nano banana And OpenAI First image model She’s also only a few months old, which is hard to believe.
It’s more than just adding sound to videos, although that was a big leap forward this year. Veo 3 proved that cinematic AI video isn’t an oxymoron, and showed us Sora, the app and the second-generation model that powers it. A terrifying glimpse To a future where your likeness is the imagination of every weirdo on the internet. But if I can get over that nagging feeling (I still can’t), then this too is the solution Best AI video model I tested with impressive and undeniable technical prowess that eliminates common AI errors.
Also this year, we’ve heard more than ever from artists, creators and copyright holders that generative AI models are being created and deployed irresponsibly. Disney and Warner Bros. Vigorous copyright lawsuits have been filed Google and Midjourney, describing the latter as “an endless pit of plagiarism.” Anthropist A. declared $1.5 billion settlement With the authors who accused it piracy. And the energy requirements of artificial intelligence, namely Especially high for videohas artificial intelligence companies racing to build massive… Data centers Across the United States, despite the concerns of local communities and environmental experts.
I spend more time than most people using these generative AI tools. These companies brand themselves as “democratizing” or “making creating art easier than ever before.” That rhetoric has been raised this year, as big tech companies, not known for their creativity and empathy with creators, try to convince potential customers that they know the ball. The technical improvements we’ve seen with the new 2025 models, coupled with their viral popularity, mean that our online lives are being filled with artificial intelligence at an alarming rate. Of course, nothing created by AI is art. a period.
I predict we’ll see more creative AI in 2026. It feels like a tide that won’t slow down. Therefore, it is more important than ever to make a clear distinction between AI-generated content and real human art. It will be more important than ever to call so-called AI “art” what it is: pathetic, boring, and unoriginal. While I’m still hopeful we’ll make it Better nomenclature for artificial intelligenceWe need to rethink how we approach creative AI and content (and… slope) that it creates because it fills our lives online.
Don’t miss any of our unbiased technical content and lab reviews. Add CNET As Google’s preferred source.
Artificial intelligence versus art
AI-generated content is an imitation of human art. This is by design. These creative AI models are designed and optimized using large human-generated data sets. For image and video models, this data includes photographs, designs, and social media posts. The broader the model’s training data, the greater its ability. For example, you can ask ChatGPT to generate Studio Ghibli-style images (which Many people did In March 2025). The model knew that the movie studio had created a specific cartoon/anime aesthetic and was able to apply that style to its AI visuals.
Because of this process, AI rarely creates anything new. In one of my favorite quotes about AI this year, screenwriter (and former Meta AI data coach) Nora Garrett said He said “AI is sold to us like it’s the future, but it’s a regurgitation of our collective past, remarketed as the future,” she told reporters while promoting her film After the Hunt.
She continues, “I think at the end of the day there will always be a human element that people want. I don’t know that making things happen faster and cheaper and more optimally is actually conducive to the human spirit and our human collectivity.”
(This year’s runner-up quote came from Guillermo del Toro. When he asked Regarding his position on the use of artificial intelligence, he said: “I would rather die.”)
I’m not saying you can’t make art from piecing together pieces of the past, but creative AI models are limited in a way that human creativity is not. AI cannot fundamentally communicate with people in the same way that art can. It is not designed to make us think deeply; In fact, there is growing evidence that we are Stop thinking critically When using artificial intelligence. Great art makes us feel uncomfortable, shows us things we don’t want to see, and connects us to our collective humanity. Artificial intelligence is Notoriously terrible In that.
To give a seasonal example, take “The Nutcracker” by Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. If you’ve watched the show, you may remember that it ends with a duet by the Sugar Plum Fairy and her knight. It is one of the most popular dances, partly due to the emotional and inventive musical composition. Tchaikovsky famous books The 1892 ballet is about him mourning the death of his sister Alexandra, and you can hear that melancholy, melancholic influence in the music, especially in the pas de deux. The emotional heart of ballet is so strong that… People move 133 years after its original release. So-called AI music generators can do that never Manage it.
Even legitimate uses of AI that don’t claim to be art come with risks. We have seen a boom in artificial intelligence, low-quality, garbage, plastic and seemingly useless images and videos. It’s inevitable on social media, and the increase in creative AI models this year has made it that much worse. Although this decline does not pretend to be art, it is everywhere on the Internet, and, as my colleague Abrar Al-Hiti wrote earlier this year, social media An antisocial wasteland.
We can’t trust technology companies to stop the “art” of AI or tinker
Technology companies have made clear this year that generative images and video are now essential, and are critical components of winning the AI race. It is a well-funded and highly competitive marathon where any innovation can give each company the advantage it needs to stay in business and retain its users.
For this reason, we cannot rely on AI companies to make or break the “art” of AI. Many companies have invested in ways to Prevent deepfakes and other potentially illegal content, but we’ve already seen examples of how easy it is to circumvent the rules of each system. AI detection technology is important however Not advanced enough To catch every instance of misinformation generated by artificial intelligence.
If we want to stop the spread of AI “art,” we have to make it uncool.
The only way to slow supply is to reduce demand. Generative AI is so ubiquitous — and in specific uses like brainstorming or personalization, useful — that it’s hard to imagine it stopping altogether. But we can be more thoughtful about how we use them. AI is not always the right tool for every project. Great creative work is often found in the process of doing that work. Creative work is cognitive work, and replacing this intellectual and emotional work with artificial intelligence only leads to neglect.
We have to demand the best from ourselves and our creators. This movement against AI and the decline of AI is already well underway. Backlash against McDonald’s and Coca-Cola AI holiday ads It was fast. Artists who share their work online assert that their work did not use AI, while others declare themselves AI haters.
We cannot raise the level of AI enthusiast to the level of professional creator. And we can’t let professional creatives and brands get away with feeding us AI instead of human-centered work. We certainly cannot allow technology companies to get away with the belief that their failure in AI is an unfortunate but unavoidable consequence of innovation. We can and must do better in 2026.