Poor question: "Was this generated by AI?" Better question: "How was AI used in the creation of this?" The first suggests that the only way generative AI can be used is by entering text into a chatbot, pushing a button, and getting an output. This is how it worked in 2022. The second recognizes that generative AI can be incorporated into the creative or production process in an infinite numbers of ways, at any step. This is how it works today.
Erin Schmidt
8mo
Good and important reframing!
EMMY® Nominated | Content & Creative Production Pro
8moSo true. genAI is only as good as its operator/creator. Peoples' perception that genAI just gives you the answers, a perfectly written article, or the exact creative you're looking for on first prompt is conflating this with search, copywriters, and stock repositories. genAI enables the craft. This is why it's important for creators to be educated on how to use genAI tools to assist in their creation and present it as such. Same as citing your sources for that Google'd answer, freelance writer, or stock image, creatives should feel empowered to share that they activated AI to assist in the creation of their work. This approach could also help businesses start to harness this practice as a capability and structure ways for their creative humans to 'cite their sources' and ensure blended assets (Human Intelligence + Artificial Intelligence) have the proper metadata, usage rights, and compliance during it's journey.