Users and regulators alike recognise the need for public consultation around new developments in artificial intelligence (AI). However, most consultations reflect economic or political concerns and tend to focus on Generative AI (GenAI) impacts on the traditional workforce, excluding gig economy workers in general and content creators in particular. In this two-stage study, we firstly report qualitative findings from a survey of 100 content creators, using these to design a quantitative survey issued to 307 content creators. In our thematic analysis of the qualitative data, we report a nuanced response to GenAI tools. Participants recognised that they might help to reduce an unmanageable workload, but that they might also render them redundant in certain contexts. Our content creators spoke meaningfully about different forms of loss, not just of jobs or of creativity, but also of the passion and the dedication to learning that provided much of the intrinsic motivation for creation. Quantitative survey findings showed that those who’d had greater experience of AI felt less threatened by the technology, but that concerns remained about fairness, data privacy and a rise in targeted advertising. Overall, we found that more diverse experiences need to be represented and considered in the public consultations informing the development and regulation of GenAI.
Are et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: