Rebooting the debate: Generative AI and creative work
Rewatch the debate!
X Please note: Once you watch the video, data will be transmitted to Youtube/Google. For more information, see Google Privacy.
General Information
Chat-GPT and other language-learning models (LLMs) have seen a sulfurous rise in popularity among consumers, workers and businesses alike. Although, it is still early days, the technology is already affecting a wide range of creatives, from professional writers to illustrators. While LLMs may boost productivity, especially of less skilled workers, the way it is developed and deployed worsens the working conditions for millions. These workers now find themselves competing with their own work, a dynamic that favours corporate employers and capital.
For instance, one of the leading generative AI firms, OpenAI, aims to build “highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work” (see their manifesto). However, they often ignore the views and interests of the millions of workers on whose work and data their technology has been built. While OpenAI CEO Sam Altman pays lip-service to “AI serving all of humanity”, only collective action can ensure that AI benefits affected workers and advances the production of quality content.
That is why FES Future of Work, with the support of UNI Europa, organised on October 2nd this conference in Brussels to engage the labour movement, civil society, and policymakers to find collective answers to generative AI. Expect a debate about collective organising, copyright and much more.
We were honoured that MEP Brando Benifei set the scene with his opening remarks. Afterwards, in our first panel "Generative Industries, Generative AI, and Labour: The Path Ahead", we explored some promising initiatives. Ellen Stutzman from the Writers Guild of America shared how Hollywood writers and trade unions successfully pushed back against unrestricted use of generative AI. Together with Johannes Studinger, head of the Media, Entertainment & Arts sector at UNI Europa, Frédéric Young, executive director at the Society of Dramatic Authors and Composers Belgium (SACD) and Society of Multimedia Authors (SCAM) and artist and independent researcher Portrait XO, we discussed questions such as how should creative workers respond to the rise of generative AI, and how can they ensure they benefit from it. What can we learn from collectives about organizing and representing workers' rights?
In the second panel, we examined generative AI from a legal and policy perspective. We were excited to welcome European policy-makers Alex Agius Saliba, Alexandra Geese and Axel Voss, as well as Teresa Nobre, legal director at the COMMUNIA Association, and Matthias Hornschuh , German composer and spokesperson of "Authors‘ Rights Initiative". Togehter, they focused on questions such as: What actions are needed to resolve the tension between generative AI and values like the right to data protection and artists´ rights to the fruits of their work (copyright)?
For more information, please write to Oliver Philipp or Justin Nogarede
Report of the Conference
With AI technologies becoming increasingly integrated into work processes, from generating content to automating repetitive tasks, the conversation has shifted toward finding a balance between innovation and workers’ rights. On 2 October 2024, at a FES Future of Work conference – with the support of UNI Europa - on Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung was bringing together trade unions, artists, civil society and policymakers, including Ellen Stutzman from the Writers’ Guild of America and various members of European Parliament. They delivered a powerful message: whether AI enhances our work or strips it of its creative essence depends on workers’ ability to shape the terms of technology use through collective bargaining.
Opening the conference, Knut Dethlefsen, the new director of FES Future of Work, posed the central question: “How can the technological progress of AI benefit those that do creative work – and allow for innovation without stifling freedom?” This sentiment reflects a broader anxiety about AI’s transformative power. While technological advances promise greater efficiency, there is growing concern that without proper safeguards, they could erode the rights of workers, particularly in cultural and creative industries.
Innovation without exploitation
The European Union is currently navigating this delicate balance through legislative frameworks like the AI Act, designed to regulate the use of AI technologies. Member of European Parliament Brando Benifei, one of the key speakers at the conference, expressed both optimism and caution about the future of AI in Europe. “If you look at the progress made by generative AI in the last two years, it’s incredible,” he said. “But we want to create good conditions for creative workers without obstructing innovation.”
Benifei emphasised that the stakes are high, particularly in terms of how AI might be used to exploit the work of creatives. He noted that member states have been lobbied heavily to water down the AI Act, and that the economic interest lies in using creative content to train AI systems. “There are already lobbying activities to make sure regulation in Europe of AI fails,” Benifei warned. “We need to ensure that the creative worker can be protected from harsh exploitation.”
Augmentation or displacement
The debate over AI’s impact is particularly intense in cultural and creative industries, which have been described as “ground zero” for the changes AI is bringing to the workplace. Daniel Mügge, a professor of political arithmetic, highlighted the shift in the conversation about AI. “Today, we are no longer having a discussion about AI creating a jobless society through automation,” he said. “It is much more about the quality of work, the satisfaction that workers get from their work, the security workers feel.” Mügge’s remarks resonate with many creatives who are grappling with how AI will affect their livelihoods. AI offers significant opportunities to offload repetitive tasks, allowing workers to focus on more creative endeavors.
The artist and independent researcher Portrait XO shared that, "Back in the early 2010s, I also felt uneasy about AI. I began exploring it in my artistic work, particularly the question of how artists can maintain agency over AI and how we can give consent regarding the use of our work."
Johannes Studinger, head of UNI’s Media, Entertainment & Arts sector, underlined that AI should be used to augment human activity, not displace it. “Creation is a human activity,” he stated. “It is not acceptable that AI displaces the products of authors and creatives.” The potential for AI to streamline work processes and improve work-life balance is a key selling point for advocates. Studinger noted that unions are already negotiating how AI can be used to better plan productions, saving time and giving workers more flexibility. However, this optimism is tempered by fears of job degradation, loss of creative control, and exploitation of intellectual property.
Struggles and Strikes
The growing concerns about AI’s potential misuse have already led to significant labour actions, most notably the 148-day strike by US writers organised in the Writers Guild of America (WGA). The WGA strike, which lasted 148 days, brought solidarity from across the labour movement. Ellen Stutzman, the former chief negotiator for the WGA and now Executive Director of WGA-West, shared insights from the recent strike, which demonstrated the power of collective action. “When we went into negotiations with producers, they were stone-walling,” Stutzman recounted. “It was only until the strike that they came back to the negotiating table.”
A key issue in the strike was the role of AI in content creation. Stutzman emphasised that the WGA succeeded in defining AI’s role as research, not writing. “AI isn’t writing,” she said, underscoring the need for transparency and compensation when AI uses the work of human creatives to train its algorithms. “There needs to be affirmative consent and transparency,” she added.
Stutzman’s experience underscores a broader concern within the creative industries: AI’s ability to mine past creations without proper compensation or consent. Frédéric Young, executive director of the Society of Dramatic Authors and Composers Belgium, called this practice “the big steal,” referring to the dual exploitation of past and present human creativity.
Legislative and policy responses
As AI continues to evolve, legislators and policymakers are grappling with how to protect creative workers. Paul Keller, director of policy at Open Future, pointed out that current legislation, such as the Copyright Directive and the AI Act, lacks provisions for remuneration for creative workers whose content is used to train AI systems. Alexandra Geese, a Member of the European Parliament, echoed this concern, emphasising the need for Europe to build its own technological capacities to maintain sovereignty over its digital infrastructure. “A dysfunctional market endangers cultural diversity – a problem AI intensifies,” she warned.
In the debate over copyright issues, Teresa Nobre from the Communion Association pointed out that discussions around generative AI need to extend beyond copyright alone. It’s also essential to consider how other areas of law can contribute to the conversation and help protect creatives.
Benifei and other policymakers see the AI Act as a critical tool for ensuring that AI serves the interests of workers, not just corporations. However, they face significant challenges from lobbying efforts and the immense economic interests at play. “The pressure is very high,” Benifei admitted, noting that prime ministers across Europe have been lobbied to dilute the AI Act. Alex Agius Saliba, a Member of the European Parliament from the S&D Group, emphasised that in discussions about creative work, remuneration must be seen as the central issue. "There is a gap here," he noted, "and it’s one we need to address and resolve."
From an artist's perspective, Matthias Hornschuh, a German composer and spokesperson for the Authors' Rights Initiative, stated that a dysfunctional market threatens cultural diversity—a problem that is intensified by AI. "We need to ensure that knowledge work is incentivised in the future," he emphasised.
Oliver Roethig, UNI Europa Regional Secretary, echoed the sentiment that AI is not a new challenge but part of a continuous process of technological evolution. “Trade unions and workers are not against the future and change – we have to shape it,” Roethig said. He emphasised that the focus must be on how the productivity gains from AI are distributed between creative workers, producers, and investors. “We are talking about managing transformation,” he added, calling for frameworks that empower workers through collective bargaining.
Article by Daniel Kopp, UNI Europa (edited by Oliver Philipp, FES Future of Work)
For the orgignal article click here.