Article Text
Generative artificial intelligence is moving rapidly into creative work, intensifying fears that actors, musicians and other artists could lose opportunities to virtual performers and automated content.
Unlike the broader field of AI, generative AI produces material such as writing, images, graphics, video, audio and music. The technology emerged during the 2010s but gained widespread attention after modern large language models, including OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini, became available.
One prominent example is Tilly Norwood, an AI-generated actress introduced as a new Hollywood face in 2025. Dutch actress and producer Eline Van der Velden created the character with her company, Particle6, for a proposed genre of fully AI-generated films.
The project drew significant criticism, particularly after Van der Velden disclosed plans to develop more virtual characters. The backlash reflected wider anxiety that synthetic performers could take work away from human actors and other production professionals.
Similar questions have surfaced in music. Listeners have speculated that Sienna Rose, an artist with more than 4 million monthly Spotify listeners, uses AI-generated music. Skepticism has centered on her rapid rise and the unusually large amount of music released over a short period, though the speculation alone does not establish how the songs were made.
These cases have sharpened concerns about the future of creative employment. Critics argue that expanding the use of AI could threaten thousands of music and entertainment jobs while sidelining skills that artists spend years developing.
They also see human emotion as essential to acting and music. AI systems can imitate expressions of feeling, but they do not experience the passion or emotional depth that human creators bring to their work.
That distinction is becoming harder for audiences to detect as the technology improves. Increasingly convincing AI-generated material can make it difficult to determine whether a person or a machine produced an image, performance or song.
For artists, the issue goes beyond who receives credit. Human creative work often requires extensive practice, experimentation and time, while generative systems can produce content from a written prompt. Critics worry that treating those outputs as equivalent could diminish the value placed on human labor.
Generative AI is still developing, but its growing role in entertainment could have lasting effects on creative livelihoods. As new tools and virtual performers emerge, audiences and industry leaders will need to think critically about when AI should be used and what protections human creators may need.