![]() ![]() “You just point to the fact that the tech exists and you can impugn the integrity of the stuff that’s real.” This dynamic works in the opposite direction too, as demonstrated by the royal portrait released yesterday. “You don’t need to create the fake video for this tech to have a serious impact,” she said at the time. ![]() And as the royal-photo fiasco shows, the deepfake age doesn’t need to be powered by generative AI-a hasty Photoshop will do.īack in 2018, I spoke with Renee DiResta, a researcher at the Stanford Internet Observatory, about AI tools being used by bad actors to cast doubt on real events. Instead, it’s mundane: People now feel a pervasive, low-grade disorientation, suspicion, and distrust. This post-truth universe doesn’t feel like chaotic science fiction. The royal-portrait debacle illustrates that this era isn’t forthcoming. Experts have reasoned that technology might become so good at conjuring synthetic media that it becomes difficult for anyone to believe anything they didn’t witness themselves. Not buying it.”įor years, researchers and journalists have warned that deepfakes and generative-AI tools may destroy any remaining shreds of shared reality. As one popular response to the statement put it, “I am struggling to believe that the most famous royal family in the world-and the woman who would be queen-fiddled around with photoshop and put out a family pic (designed to quash rumours about her whereabouts) without anyone in the ranks inspecting it. In response to the blowback, Kensington Palace released a statement earlier today-signed with a “C,” likely in reference to Middleton’s formal name, Catherine-saying in part that “like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing.” That post has only made things worse. Read: Just asking questions about Kate Middleton “I wasn’t in on this whole conspiracy about Kate Middleton missing and the royals covering it up until they dropped this obviously fake photo today to appease public concern,” one amateur photographer wrote on X, citing a “few unexplainable issues.” There are unexpectedly blurred lines in the image, and Middleton is missing her wedding and engagement rings. The children seem to have weird hand positions. They wondered why there are leaves on the trees despite the photo supposedly having been taken in early March. The AP noted that the photo appeared to have been “manipulated.”Īcross social media, onlookers offered amateur analyses of the photograph, suggesting that it was poorly Photoshopped or perhaps touched up using AI. Such oddities were enough to cause the AP, Agence France-Presse, and Reuters to release kill notifications-alerts that the wire services would no longer distribute the photo. According to the Associated Press, “the photo shows an inconsistency in the alignment of Princess Charlotte’s left hand”-it looks to me like part of the princess’s sleeve is disappearing. Royal watchers and news organizations naturally pored over the image, and they found a number of alarming peculiarities. Middleton has been away from the public eye since December reportedly because of unspecified health issues, leading to a ceaseless parade of conspiracy theories. In just one day, the photograph has transformed from a hastily released piece of public-relations damage control into something of a Rorschach test-a collision between plausibility and conspiracy.įor the uninitiated: Yesterday, in celebration of Mother’s Day in the U.K., the Royal Family released a portrait on Instagram of Kate Middleton with her three children. If you’re looking for an image that perfectly showcases the confusion and chaos of a choose-your-own-reality information dystopia, you probably couldn’t do better than yesterday’s portrait of Catherine, Princess of Wales. Produced by ElevenLabs and News Over Audio (NOA) using AI narration.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |