“They are changing my voice or whatever they are doing, modifying their voices to make me look like me, and people are commenting on us as if I were me and I’m not me,” said Washington recently to Wired, when he was asked to Ai. “I don’t have an Instagram account. I don’t have Tiktok. I have nothing of this. So something I hear from that – I’m not even me, and unfortunately, people are only following and this is the world you live in.”
For Clark, the talk show videos are a clear appeal to encourage moral indignation: allow the public to commit more easily with disinformation. “It is a great emotion to trigger if you want a commitment. If you make someone feel sad or injured, they will probably keep it for themselves. While if you make them hear outraged, they will probably share the video with similar friends and write a long rant in the comments,” he says. It does not even matter, he explains, if the events represented are not real or are also clearly declared as “generated” if the characters involved could act plausibly in this way (in the mind of their spectators, at least), in some other scenario. YouTube ecosystem also inevitably plays a role. With so many spectators who consume passively content while driving, cleaning, too fall asleepThe contents generated by the AI must no longer appear polished when merge into a flow of information absorbed passively.
Reality Defender, a company specialized in identifying Deepfakes, has revised some of the videos. “We can share that some of our family and friends (in particular the elderly part) met videos like these and, although they were not completely persuaded, they checked -in with us (knowing that we are experts) for the validity, as they were on the fence”, Ben Colman, co -founder and CEO of reality Defender, says Wired.
Wired also contacted several channels for a comment. Only a creator, owner of a channel with 43,000 subscribers, replied.
“I am just creating interviews with imaginary history and clearly lead the description of each video,” they say, speaking anonymously. “I chose the imaginary interview format because it allows me to combine the narrative, creativity and a touch of realism in a unique way. These videos feel engaging – as if you were watching a real moment – and that emotional realism really attracts people. Is it like giving the public a” What if? “Scenario that seems dramatic, intense or even surprising, despite being completely imaginary.”
But when it comes to the probable reason behind the channels, most of which are based outside the United States, nor a rigorous political agenda nor a sudden career pivot to the immersive narrative acts as an adequate explanation. A channel with an e -mail that uses the term “earnings”, however, suggests more obvious financial intentions, as well as the repetitive nature of the channels, with wiring seeing evidence of duplicated videos and more channels managed by the creators themselves, including some who had the sided twin channels.
This is not surprising, with more farms than ever, in particular those who turn to vulnerables, currently cementing on YouTube together with the rise of artificial generative intelligence. Through the scoreboard, the creators choose controversial topics such as children’s TV characters in compromising situations, P. Diddy’s sex traffic processTo generate more commitment and income – as much as possible.
Be First to Comment