Image from Wikimedia. Created by Jernej Furman. Creative Commons License: CC BY 2.0
Speaking through video chat from his home in Seattle, Jae Lim considers what exactly art is. “You could use two rocks and make something interesting. To me, I think that’s media or entertainment or art.” As the creative director of Lifetime Brands, Lim spends his days working through designs for brand imagery. In this field, he sees many unique styles from different designers. This includes a few designers who generate most of their work through Artificial Intelligence, or AI. “We all use tools to figure out how to move people. There’s painting or photography, or now even AI, if you can utilize that tool well.”
Artificial intelligence has quickly become a household tool. With a simple prompt, users can generate almost anything within a matter of seconds. For many, AI is a fast and efficient way to create or innovate. However, like nearly all other technological advancements, AI usage comes with associated concerns. Issues such as job displacement, theft, misinformation, and environmental impacts could all be caused by AI. Still, Artificial Intelligence is considered to be a step toward the future of technology.
Image from Wikimedia. Created by Mark Cruz. Creative Commons License: CC0.
.jpg){kind=link}
It’s undeniable that Artificial Intelligence is rapidly changing the world around us. This technology is altering the work of most occupations, both positively and negatively. The creation of art, media, and entertainment is one of the biggest industries that is facing adjustments due to AI generated works.
From designers to musicians, the wide variety of artists vary on their opinions about Artificial Intelligence as a tool for creation. Ultimately, it will be up to them as to how each creative field transforms alongside technological advancements. Is AI the new way to create? Or is it a morally questionable choice?
What is AI Generated Media?
Through Artificial Intelligence programs, users can generate digital works of art. These programs include Chat-GPT and Gemini, which are both public and available for mass use. Both Chat-GPT and Gemini are only two of the many generative models out there that allow users to make art. After simply typing in a prompt, Generative AI will create what the user has requested. This can include photographs, paintings, text, music, and more.
Previously, the creation of art has been considered an activity that only humans were capable of, due to ability to think creatively (Bosonogov, 2024). Generative AI has completely changed this thought process. Although it cannot think creatively, it can create art. However, some artists disagree with the idea that these works should be considered art.
Image from Flickr. Generated by Dall-E. Creative Commons License: CC0
Is AI Stealing From Artists?
The issue of AI stealing from artists comes from the fact that this technology learns through machine learning. This process involves the system being trained on massive amounts of pre-existing data, including human made works of art. The overall goal or idea behind machine learning is to replicate human thinking.
Once AI gains an understanding of the data, it can begin to generate based off what it has learned. This can include the machine studying specific styles of art or the style of a particular artist, which then allows it to mimic it (Bozard, 2023). Some social media trends have users generating images in the styles of famous artists, such as Hayao Miyazaki and Charles Schulz.
This brings up the debate, is AI stealing from artists? For many, the answer to this question varies. While AI is trained on pre-existing works of art, to generate a work, it takes little pieces from thousands of artworks and puts them together. This makes it extremely difficult to find similarity with one piece or one specific artist (Bozard, 2023). Without a direct connection to one work, it’s difficult to say it’s theft.
Despite this, some artists still feel that AI generated works are art theft. Fashion design student Maria Mourad from the European Institute of Design said, “I really do think AI is stealing from artists. In order for AI to work, you have to feed it with information and anything it creates comes from what you’ve fed it.”
Image from Wikimedia. Prompted by Jerry M. Pearson. Generated by Stable Diffusion XL. Creative Commons License: CC0
How is AI Used by Artists?
On the other hand, some artists believe AI is a revolutionary tool for creation and are utilizing it for their own works. Artificial Intelligence has become a tool that can expedite the brainstorming or early design process. From doing an analysis of the target audience to creating mockups, AI can turn what can be a tedious task into a fast and easy step. Additionally, by speeding up this process, designers have more time to experiment with multiple ideas. Alternatively, they can evolve their original idea in a much less time-consuming manner (Jin, 2025).
One example of artists that are using AI in their creative process is jewelers. Some jewelry designers are utilizing AI to make mock-up designs of potential future pieces (Magee, 2024). Additionally, some musicians have adopted the use of AI tools for music production and the songwriting process. This includes having artificial intelligence generate fragments of music, allowing the musician to skip the brainstorming step and begin with re-shaping what AI has provided them with (Berkowitz, 2024). Furthermore, even the creation of movies is changing because of AI. From the screenwriting process to visual effects to animation, filmmakers are implementing the use of generative AI in nearly every step (Reddy, 2024).
Justin Joyce from the Seattle band Service Animal is one musician who is trying to find a balance with AI usage. He stated, “It’s a powerful tool. Used correctly and ethically, it has a lot of positive benefits it can provide. It can do a lot of the grunt work for us. We just have to make sure not to let it do all of the work.”
While many recognize that AI cannot replace the artist entirely, it can be a helpful tool for generating an idea in the first place (Magee, 2024). After all, AI is far from perfect, and its works do lack authentic artistic expression. That part of creation will always need humans.
Image from Wikimedia. Created by Khara Woods. Creative Commons License: CC0.
What do Consumers Think?
Consumers play an important part of media creation. The people directly influence art by determining the popularity and demand. Various studies have been done that take a look at how consumers feel about AI generated media.
One study showed that an audience is more likely to show favor to human created works. However, this is only true if they are aware that the work is human created. If they are unaware, the audience has equal or more satisfaction from AI generated works as they do works made by humans. Additionally, this study showed that consumers still enjoy AI generated works, even if they prefer those made by humans (Zhang & Gosline, 2023).
Moreover, another study showed similar results. When high levels of experience and agency are attributed to an artist, consumer appreciation increases. Artificial Intelligence is usually attributed less agency and experience than the average artist. The results of this study did show that to be true. Despite this, it also showed no support for viewers having a negative response to AI generated works. This is only true as long as they are aware of the creation process (Messingschlager & Appel, 2025).
Overall, humans tend to have more appreciation for human made works. Yet, they still enjoy art that was made by Artificial Intelligence. Works made by AI may be seen as something entirely separate from human made works. This does not mean they are inadequate.
Is AI Generated Media the New Way?
Ultimately, it will be up to artists and consumers alike whether or not AI generated works become the new way media is created. Each individual artist will have to decide if they believe using this tool is stealing from their peers or if they believe it’s revolutionizing the creative process. Each individual consumer will have to decide if they want to watch or listen to works that are not human made. When it comes to Artificial Intelligence, the people have the power to determine the future of this technology. We may not know what it’s fully capable of becoming, but we can decide how we use it.
“We’re still in the infancy of this technology and we haven’t really dealt with all of the ramifications of it yet,” expressed Joyce. “We’re in a transition period as this technology becomes more and more incorporated into our daily lives and what we do. It’s going to come down to each individual as to how we utilize it.”
References
Berkowitz, Adam Eric. “‘Gimme Some Truth’: AI Music and Implications for Copyright and Cataloging.” Information Technology & Libraries, vol. 43, no. 3, Sept. 2024, pp. 1–15. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.oregonstate.idm.oclc.org/10.5860/ital.v43i3.17072.
Bosonogov, S., and A. Suvorova. “Perception of Ai-Generated Art: Text Analysis of Online Discussions.” Journal of Mathematical Sciences, vol. 285, no. 1, Oct. 2024, pp. 1–13. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.oregonstate.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10958-024-07418-0.
Bozard, Zachary. “What Does It Mean to Create Art? Intellectual Property Rights for Artificial Intelligence Generated Artworks.” South Carolina Journal of International Law & Business, vol. 20, no. 1, Sept. 2023, pp. 83–101. EBSCOhost, research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=ae387080-95fb-3ac5-8300-c2e9f7ceb7d3.
Jin, Jian, et al. “Empowering Design Innovation Using AI-Generated Content.” Journal of Engineering Design, vol. 36, no. 1, Jan. 2025, pp. 1–18. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.oregonstate.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/09544828.2024.2401751.
Magee, Michael D. “Generative Artificial Intelligence as a Tool for Jewelry Design.” Gems & Gemology, vol. 60, no. 3, Sept. 2024, pp. 330–47. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.oregonstate.idm.oclc.org/10.5741/GEMS.60.3.330.
Messingschlager, Tanja Veronika, and Markus Appel. “Mind Ascribed to AI and the Appreciation of AI-Generated Art.” New Media & Society, vol. 27, no. 3, Mar. 2025, pp. 1673–92. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.oregonstate.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/14614448231200248.
Reddy, Vundela Sivakrishna, et al. “Revolutionizing Animation: Unleashing the Power of Artificial Intelligence for Cutting-Edge Visual Effects in Films.” Soft Computing – A Fusion of Foundations, Methodologies & Applications, vol. 28, no. 1, Jan. 2024, pp. 749–63. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.oregonstate.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s00500-023-09448-3.
Yunhao Zhang, and Renée Gosline. “Human Favoritism, Not AI Aversion: People’s Perceptions (and Bias) toward Generative AI, Human Experts, and Human-GAI Collaboration in Persuasive Content Generation.” Judgment & Decision Making, vol. 18, Jan. 2023, pp. 1–16. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.oregonstate.idm.oclc.org/10.1017/jdm.2023.37.