SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
sag-aftra
Bargaining to Save Our Jobs from Artificial Intelligence
There is broad and deep recognition that AI technology will reshape the future of work, and unions have decided to roll up their sleeves (and dust off their picket signs) to bargain how AI will be implemented, to do what, and to what effect.
May 07, 2026
For many pundits and policymakers, there is little doubt that Artificial Intelligence will devour the jobs of millions of people, including professionals formerly presumed immune to technological replacement. The only question is how many jobs will be lost, how quickly. In fact, there is nothing inevitable about AI—not its development, its deployment, or its impact. Massive job losses are not inherent in the algorithm, preordained by the laws of nature and physics. Rather than remaining struck by awe, we can reassert human agency over this technology. We can not only save jobs, but perhaps even make them better.
AI is not an abstract force that operates solely at the macroeconomic level. AI systems and agents are developed and implemented in ways specific to each sector, each workplace, each type of job. Although employers might focus myopically on cutting their wage bill, their employees know firsthand how the work actually gets done. They know what disclosures to request about how the technology would be used. They know how AI might affect the content and flow of their work, what training would be most helpful, and which implementations would be most likely to devalue their labor versus those most likely to enhance it. Thus, the most effective way to ensure that AI makes work life better and not worse is to empower workers to bargain about it.
By “workers” I mean people who rely on their own labor to earn a living—which is to say, most of us, whether we write reports, treat patients, teach kids, manufacture products, or stock warehouses. AI is not something that’s going to happen only to other people; it will affect all of us.
Workers need the authority and the power to bargain about the implementation of AI in the workplace, not just the effects. “Effects bargaining” is the traditional approach: After a technology has wiped out jobs, people negotiate a little severance pay to tide them over, and maybe some training for completely different jobs, if any such jobs exist. By contrast, our goal should be to make sure workers can negotiate for technology that makes their jobs better, more productive, more valuable. To avoid the car crash in the first place, if you will, and not just to apportion damages afterward.
AI will not destroy or devalue our jobs by itself, unless we let it.
One can imagine some objections to this approach. Some people might insist that AI is in irresistible force, that large-scale job destruction is inevitable, and that our task is to figure out other things for people to do to earn a living—or, if that’s not possible, to pay them a small stipend so they don’t starve. This defeatism is a short step away from the more nihilistic vision of the pure doomers, who think it might already be too late to save humanity from machine-led destruction. I love science fiction myself—but it is fiction, not history.
Another objection might be that placing restraints of any kind on AI companies in the United States will keep the industry from winning the global race for dominance. This is the Trump administration’s view. This logic is inverted. Nations should be governed for the benefit of their people, not just their Big Tech companies. Both the Republican and Democratic parties proclaim themselves to be the champions of the American worker. If so, the real triumph for the nation would be to ensure that technology enhances work and makes working people’s lives better, not to create havoc and economic devastation across the labor market.
Some might object that it is unrealistic to think that working people have the interest or ability to intervene effectively, to exercise their right to bargain about AI technology. But that is exactly what has been happening in the entertainment industry. One of the central issues in the 2023 strike by the Writers Guild of America against the Hollywood studios and producers was the use of AI in writers’ workplaces. The Guild represents the professionals who create scripts for TV and streaming series and for feature films. In late 2022 Open AI revealed that ChatGPT could write—coherently and at some length. Although the union did not conclude that robots had suddenly become capable of crafting award-winning scripts, Guild members recognized that their employers could use AI to do just enough to degrade and devalue their work.
During contract talks in 2023 the Guild proposed—and won, after a five-month strike—language that puts meaningful guardrails on the use of AI. These guardrails reflect the process writers and studios actually use to create characters and stories and full-length projects. They ensure that AI cannot be used to deprive writers of the opportunity to do the full range of writing work, and they deprive employers of the economic incentive to replace professional writers with algorithms. Guild members knew how to defend their careers, and they fought for meaningful protections.
The Guild members’ willingness to take on the AI issue, rather than passively accept that the technology would hollow out their careers, resonated with working people everywhere. The actors’ union (SAG AFTRA) also struck and won contract protections on AI, and the following year the other entertainment industry unions did the same. The entire labor movement has made workplace AI a top priority. There is broad and deep recognition that AI technology will reshape the future of work, and unions have decided to roll up their sleeves (and dust off their picket signs) to bargain how AI will be implemented, to do what, to what effect.
AI systems do not develop themselves; AI companies do. AI does not implement itself in the workplace; employers do. AI will not destroy or devalue our jobs by itself, unless we let it. Working people can and must protect their livelihoods by bargaining over AI implementation. Nothing less than the future of work is at stake.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Hollywood Union Says AI-Generated Tilly Norwood 'Not an Actor'
The synthetic performer, says SAG-AFTRA, is "a character generated by a computer program that was trained on the work of countless professional performers—without permission or compensation."
Sep 30, 2025
Screen actors and their union are among those who on Tuesday condemned a computer-generated "actress" created by a newly launched artificial intelligence studio as "not a replacement for a human being," while urging talent agencies to eschew signing synthetic performers.
Billed as Hollywood's first artificial intelligence actor, "Tilly Norwood" was introduced by Particle 6 founder and CEO Eline Van der Velden, who has launjched a new venture called Xicoia, the "world's first AI talent studio."
One of over 40 digital personalities Xicoia says it aims to develop, Norwood has attracted the attention of real-life talent agents—a development that has drawn condemnation from the powerful Screen Actors Guild–American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) union, which represents more than 160,000 performers in film, television, voice acting, video games, and other media.
“SAG-AFTRA believes creativity is, and should remain, human-centered," the union said in a statement Tuesday, adding that it is "opposed to the replacement of human performers by synthetics."
The union continued:
To be clear, "Tilly Norwood" is not an actor, it’s a character generated by a computer program that was trained on the work of countless professional performers—without permission or compensation. It has no life experience to draw from, no emotion, and, from what we’ve seen, audiences aren’t interested in watching computer-generated content untethered from the human experience. It doesn’t solve any “problem”—it creates the problem of using stolen performances to put actors out of work, jeopardizing performer livelihoods and devaluing human artistry.
"Additionally, signatory producers should be aware that they may not use synthetic performers without complying with our contractual obligations, which require notice and bargaining whenever a synthetic performer is going to be used," SAG-AFTRA added.
Individual actors also slammed Norwood's rollout, with Melissa Barrera—who has starred in films including Scream and In the Heights—taking aim at any agent who might be tempted to represent the AI character.
“Hope all actors repped by the agent that does this, drop their a$$," Barrera said. "How gross, read the room."
Natasha Lyonne, star of Russian Doll and director of Uncanny Valley, said: "Any talent agency that engages in this should be boycotted by all guilds. Deeply misguided and totally disturbed. Not the way. Not the vibe. Not the use.”
Veteran television actor Chris McKenna addressed those who think Norwood "will only replace actors," writing on social media that the AI creation "needs no hairstylist, makeup, wardrobe, lighting, direction, transportation, rest, or lunch... the trickledown will be devastating."
Van der Velden defended her creation in a Sunday Instagram post, writing, “To those who have expressed anger over the creation of my AI character, Tilly Norwood, she is not a replacement for a human being, but a creative work—a piece of art."
“Like many forms of art before her, she sparks conversation, and that in itself shows the power of creativity," she added.
SAG-AFTRA has long opposed the use of AI performers, making the issue a key part of its 2023 strike against the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers and last year's video game strike. The union has also backed legislation at the federal and state level to regulate AI.
The 2023 strike, which lasted 118 days, ended with SAG-AFTRA winning concessions including explicit consent, notification, and bargaining for the use of AI replicas of performers and safeguards against digitally generated characters replacing human actors.
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Kimmel Suspension, 400+ Entertainers Rip Government Campaign to ‘Pressure’ Them Into Silence
"In an attempt to silence its critics, our government has resorted to threatening the livelihoods of journalists, talk show hosts, artists, creatives, and entertainers across the board," the letter said.
Sep 22, 2025
After the Trump administration successfully pressured ABC to kick Jimmy Kimmel off the air last week, hundreds of artists signed an open letter Monday denouncing the government's campaign to "pressure" entertainers and journalists into silence.
The letter, organized by the ACLU, was signed by numerous household names, including Jason Bateman, Jamie Lee Curtis, Ariana DeBose, Jane Fonda, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Regina King, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Diego Luna, Lin-Manuel Miranda, Natalie Portman, Olivia Rodrigo, Martin Short, and Ramy Youssef.
"Jimmy Kimmel was taken off the air after our government threatened a private company with retaliation for Kimmel’s remarks. This is a dark moment for freedom of speech in our nation," the letter says. "This is unconstitutional and un-American. The government is threatening private companies and individuals that the president disagrees with. We can’t let this threat to our freedom of speech go unanswered."
Jimmy Kimmel was taken off the air after our government threatened a private company with retaliation, marking a dark moment for free speech in our nation.More than 400 artists across our nation signed on to say: We refuse to be silenced by those in power.
[image or embed]
— ACLU (@aclu.org) September 22, 2025 at 11:02 AM
Kimmel's suspension came hours after the Federal Communications Commission chairman, Brendan Carr, threatened to revoke the broadcast license of ABC News affiliates unless the network pulled the comedian's late-night show off the air following comments he made criticizing the President Donald Trump's reaction to the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
Major entertainment unions have condemned Kimmel's suspension, including SAG-AFTRA and the Writers Guild of America, which organized demonstrations in Times Square and outside ABC's parent company Disney over the weekend that drew hundreds of protesters, while some actors have pledged to stop working with Disney until Kimmel is reinstated.
In subsequent days, Trump continued to issue threats to the media, suggesting that he would seek to strip the broadcasting licenses of networks that give him "bad press," saying, "They’re not allowed to do that.”
The letter says that "In an attempt to silence its critics, our government has resorted to threatening the livelihoods of journalists, talk show hosts, artists, creatives, and entertainers across the board. This runs counter to the values our nation was built upon, and our Constitution guarantees."
Members of the Trump administration, including JD Vance, have also promoted a wide-ranging campaign to have private citizens reported to their employers over critical comments they made about Kirk following his assassination.
Students for Trump National Chair Ryan Fournier created a database with tens of thousands of social media accounts and has boasted of having gotten dozens of people fired over their posts, many of which simply state disagreement with Kirk even without endorsing his assassination.
"We know this moment is bigger than us and our industry. Teachers, government employees, law firms, researchers, universities, students, and so many more are also facing direct attacks on their freedom of expression," the letter says. "Regardless of our political affiliation, or whether we engage in politics or not, we all love our country. We also share the belief that our voices should never be silenced by those in power—because if it happens to one of us, it happens to all of us."
Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the ACLU, described these blacklisting efforts as the dawn of "a modern McCarthy era" with Americans "facing exactly the type of heavy-handed government censorship our Constitution rightfully forbids."
Noting that former Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.) "was ultimately disgraced and neutralized once Americans mobilized and stood up to him,” Romero said that "we must do the same today because, together, our voices are louder and, together, we will fight to be heard.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Musk and DOGE Are Following the Big Tech Playbook: Use AI to Justify Mass Layoffs
The message these tactics send is clear: Decades of public service experience can be dismissed in minutes if an AI system suggests your role is redundant.
Feb 27, 2025
Earlier this month, software firm Workday announced that it would be laying off more than 1,700 workers—or about 8.5% of its workforce—to redirect investment toward artificial intelligence. The announcement was the latest in a series of mass layoffs that have put hundreds of thousands of workers at Amazon, Intel, Microsoft, and other tech companies out of work over the past several years. Google and Meta are among the tech giants that have cited the need to invest resources in AI development as the reason for cutting jobs. AI is also a part of the rationale behind the raft of mass federal employees layoffs.
Much of the narrative about AI and jobs has focused on the threat of automation: What can AI do as well as—or better than—humans? Research on AI-driven job displacement often focuses on forecasting which jobs or tasks machines could perform in the future, and then estimating how many workers might be displaced due to this automation. A report might tell us that 30% of work hours could be automated by 2030, or a study might predict that 5% of work tasks across the economy could be performed by AI in the next 10 years.
While automation is a risk that needs to be understood and taken seriously, this framing misses a key aspect of what's happening in the economy now. After many tech firms overhired during the pandemic, companies are cutting jobs and investing in AI not to directly replace workers with machines, but to signal to investors that they're focused on future growth and profitability.
Fortunately, workers and unions are fighting back, both against AI-driven job displacement in private industry and against DOGE's attempts to dismantle the public service.
Mass layoffs are nothing new. As Les Leopold argues in his book Wall Street's War on Workers, for decades corporations have carried out mass layoffs not out of fiscal desperation, but as part of a strategy to further enrich wealthy shareholders through stock buybacks and leveraged buyouts. But now we are seeing how AI hype has become the latest justification for firing workers en masse. Tech firms aren't waiting around to see what roles AI can and can't replace before laying workers off. Instead, they're slashing jobs and redirecting resources to AI initiatives because the mere promise of AI-driven efficiency is enough to excite investors and drive up stock prices.
This strategy creates a self-fulfilling prophecy where tech firms devalue human labor to make automation seem inevitable. By carrying out mass layoffs, tech firms signal to investors and workers themselves that workers are replaceable. By reinvesting those resources in AI, firms make it more likely that AI will eventually become capable enough to replace the workers they already decided to eliminate.
The strategy of hyping AI to justify mass layoffs is exemplified by Swedish tech firm Klarna. As Noam Scheiber reports in The New York Times, when the company laid off 700 customer service workers last year, CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski didn't just announce the cuts—he celebrated them. In media appearances and investor calls, Siemiatkowski proudly predicted that the company's workforce would eventually shrink to less than half its size thanks to AI-enabled productivity gains. As Scheiber reports, Siemiatkowski may even have overstated Klarna's progress in automating jobs to try to make the company more appealing to investors. For example, while the CEO claimed that AI enabled the company to become so efficient that it halted all new hiring a year and a half ago, journalists have found that the company continues to post job listings for vacant positions. The Klarna example shows how, for some companies, automation isn't just about replacing workers with machines; it is about redefining human labor as a temporary necessity to be tolerated until AI makes it obsolete. Like many tech firms, Klarna is betting that by hyping AI's potential while disinvesting in workers, they can make their vision of an automated future into a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Elon Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is now bringing the AI-fueled mass layoff strategy to the federal government. Through DOGE, Musk and his allies are experimenting with AI tools "to identify budget cuts and detect waste and abuse," in agencies like the Department of Education and the General Services Administration (GSA). Staffers report that DOGE aims to reduce GSA's budget by up to 50%. As The Washington Post reports, "DOGE associates have been feeding vast troves of government records and databases into artificial intelligence tools, looking for unwanted federal programs and trying to determine which human work can be replaced by AI, machine-learning tools, or even robots." In other words, Musk is exploring how he can use AI as justification for carrying out mass layoffs across the federal government. The message these tactics send is clear: Decades of public service experience can be dismissed in minutes if an AI system suggests your role is redundant.
The DOGE-led mass layoffs are part of a decades-long conservative project of shrinking the federal workforce and weakening the administrative state. But what's new is how AI hype, and the guise of Silicon Valley efficiency, is being used to add a veneer of technological inevitability to this political project. "The federal government is suddenly being run like an AI startup," writes Kyle Chayka in a recent piece in The New Yorker. When DOGE staffers cite AI assessments as justification for eliminating positions, they're following the same playbook as tech CEOs: using speculative claims about AI capabilities to make workforce reduction seem like an unavoidable consequence of progress rather than a deliberate choice. DOGE's promises of AI-driven efficiency mask the reality that many government functions still require human judgment, institutional knowledge, and public service experience that no algorithm can replace. This combination of hostile management and AI hype isn't just about cutting costs—it's about redefining public service as something that can be evaluated by an algorithm and eliminated at the whims of a tech oligarch.
Fortunately, workers and unions are fighting back, both against AI-driven job displacement in private industry and against DOGE's attempts to dismantle the public service.
Workers are successfully using collective action to establish guardrails around AI usage and ensure technology serves rather than replaces human labor. The nearly five-month strike by the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) in 2023 was motivated in large part by concerns that Hollywood studios would seek to use AI in ways that undermine workers or replace them altogether. SAG-AFTRA and WGA eventually won contracts that established frameworks for how studios can and cannot use AI during the production process, ensuring that AI cannot replace human writers and actors without their consent and fair compensation. As labor journalist Alex Press reports, similar fights have played out across workplaces in the hospitality, tech, and logistics industries. Through effective strikes and collective bargaining, workers can influence how AI is implemented in the workplace, and secure protections against mass layoffs.
Unions representing federal employees are also mounting a host of legal challenges to protect workers and preserve government services. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and several other unions filed suit to block what it called "arbitrary and capricious" job cuts laid out in the Trump administration's federal worker buyout program. Meanwhile, the National Treasury Employees Union, which represents workers at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, has filed a lawsuit challenging Trump's directive to halt the bureau's operations, which the union alleges violates the constitutional separation of powers. While not directly a response to DOGE's use of AI, the lawsuits show how unions are taking action to oppose efforts to weaken federal agencies and devalue the work of career civil servants. As DOGE looks to use AI to justify mass layoffs, these lawsuits could establish important legal precedents to help protect workers from arbitrary dismissal based on algorithmic assessments.
Recent job cuts in the tech sector and in the federal government show how AI hype is being used to justify mass layoffs. Through collective action, workers are showing that AI's impact isn't predetermined by technology—it can be shaped through worker power.
This article first appeared on Power at Work and is republished here with permission.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Video Game Actors Strike for AI Protections
"The video game industry generates billions of dollars in profit annually," said one union leader. "The driving force behind that success is the creative people who design and create those games."
Jul 25, 2024
After nearly two years of negotiations with video game giants and no deal that would protect performers from artificial intelligence, unionized voice and motion capture actors who work in video game development announced Thursday that they will go on strike starting at 12:01 am on Friday, July 26.
The performers are represented by Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), which last year won a contract for TV and film actors that included "unprecedented provisions for consent and compensation that will protect members from the threat of AI," after the union went on strike for four months.
The union has been negotiating on behalf of video game actors with major production companies including Disney Character Voices Inc., Activision Productions Inc., and WB Games Inc., and has won concessions over wages and job safety—but "AI protections remain the sticking point," said SAG-AFTRA on Thursday as the impending strike was announced.
Unionized actors want protections that would stop video game companies from training AI to replicate actors' voices or likeness without their consent and without compensating them.
"The video game industry generates billions of dollars in profit annually," said Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, national executive director and chief negotiator for SAG-AFTRA. "The driving force behind that success is the creative people who design and create those games. That includes the SAG-AFTRA members who bring memorable and beloved game characters to life, and they deserve and demand the same fundamental protections as performers in film, television, streaming, and music: fair compensation and the right of informed consent for the AI use of their faces, voices, and bodies."
"Frankly, it's stunning that these video game studios haven't learned anything from the lessons of last year—that our members can and will stand up and demand fair and equitable treatment with respect to AI, and the public supports us in that," he added.
Sarah Elmaleh, negotiating committee chair for the union's interactive media agreement, said the negotiations have shown the companies "are not interested in fair, reasonable AI protections, but rather flagrant exploitation."
"We look forward to collaborating with teams on our interim and independent contracts, which provide AI transparency, consent, and compensation to all performers, and to continuing to negotiate in good faith with this bargaining group when they are ready to join us in the world we all deserve," said Elmaleh.
The unionized actors voted in favor of the strike authorization with a 98.32% yes vote, said SAG-AFTRA.
The strike was announced as more than 500 workers who help develop the popular World of Warcraft video game franchise voted to join the Communications Workers of America (CWA), with the games publisher, Blizzard Entertainment, recognizing the bargaining unit.
CWA noted that the workers' journey to union representation began with a walkout in 2021 at Activision Blizzard, which was later bought by Microsoft, over sexual harassment and discrimination.
"What we've accomplished at World of Warcraft is just the beginning," Eric Lanham, a World of Warcraft test analyst, said in a statement. "We know that when workers have a protected voice, it's a win-win for employee standards, the studio, and World of Warcraft fans looking for the best gaming experience."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Number of US Workers Who Joined Major Strikes Surged by 280% in 2023
"From the United Auto Workers to nurses across the country, these strikes provided critical leverage to workers to secure better wages and working conditions," said one expert.
Feb 21, 2024
While federal data released on Wednesday shows nearly half a million workers last year participated in 33 major work stoppages—the most since the turn of the century—labor experts still stressed the need for more policies protecting the right to strike.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics noted that there has been an average of 16.7 U.S. work stoppages with more than 1,000 strikers over the past two decades, meaning last year's number was almost double the norm. BLS also said that 458,900 workers joined the 2023 strikes, and nearly 87% of them work in service-providing industries, including 188,900 with jobs in education and health.
In their analysis of the data, also published Wednesday, Margaret Poydock and Jennifer Sherer of the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) pointed out that "this is an increase of over 280% from the number of workers involved in major worker stoppages in 2022, which was 120,600. Further, it is on par with the increase seen in pre-pandemic levels during 2018 and 2019."
Poydock, a senior policy analyst at the think tank, said in a statement that "a surge of workers went on strike in 2023 to fight back against record corporate profits, stratospheric CEO pay, and decades of stagnant wages. From the United Auto Workers to nurses across the country, these strikes provided critical leverage to workers to secure better wages and working conditions."
Other notable actions include the actors' and writers' strikes that together effectively shut down television and film production for months. A report released last week by researchers at Cornell University and the University of Illinois—who, unlike the BLS, also tracked smaller U.S. actions—tallied 466 strikes and four lockouts involving a total of 539,000 workers.
"It's a historic moment for the labor movement," declared Robert Reich, a former U.S. labor secretary who is now a University of California, Berkeley professor. "Workers are done letting billionaires and corporations hoard all the wealth and power."
As Poydock and Sherer, EPI's State Worker Power Initiative director, wrote in their report:
It should be no surprise that workers are taking collective action to improve their pay and working conditions—but we should be asking why it is happening now. The U.S. economy has churned out unequal income growth and stagnant wages for the last several decades. Research shows that unions and collective bargaining are key tools in combating income inequality and improving the pay, benefits, and working conditions for both union and nonunion workers. However, the continued rise in collective action is not likely to increase unionization substantially unless meaningful policy change is enacted to ensure all workers have the right to form unions, bargain collectively, and strike.
The BLS said last month that "the union membership rate—the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of
unions—was 10% in 2023, little changed from the previous year."
"In the public sector, both union membership and the union membership rate (32.5%) were little changed over the year," the bureau added. "The number of union workers employed in the private sector increased by 191,000 to 7.4 million in 2023, while the unionization rate was unchanged at 6%."
Stressing that "the increase in major strike activity in 2023 occurred despite our weak and outdated labor law failing to protect workers' right to strike," Sherer argued that "federal and state action is needed to ensure the right to strike."
At the federal level, EPI supports several proposals. As Poydock and Sherer detailed:
- The Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act includes critical reforms that would strengthen private sector workers' right to strike. The PRO Act would expand the scope for strikes by eliminating the prohibition on secondary strikes and allowing the use of intermittent strikes. It would also strengthen workers’ ability to strike by prohibiting employers from permanently replacing striking workers.
- The Striking and Locked Out Workers Healthcare Protection Act would prevent employers from cutting off health coverage of workers and family members in retaliation against striking workers.
- The Food Secure Strikers Act would allow striking workers to qualify for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits.
- Congress should also pursue policies that extend a fully protected right to strike to railway, airline, public sector, agricultural, and domestic workers. None of these workers has the fundamental right to strike under current federal law.
"Right now, only a dozen states grant limited rights to strike to some public sector workers," the pair also highlighted. "States should also join New York and New Jersey in making striking workers eligible for unemployment benefits."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FTC Proposes Ban on Impersonations of Individuals, Including With AI Deepfakes
The announcement came the same day that OpenAI—the company behind ChatGPT—unveiled a new tool called Sora that can generate a minute-long video from a written prompt, upping the regulatory stakes.
Feb 16, 2024
The Federal Trade Commissionproposed a new rule on Thursday that would ban the impersonation of individuals, including with the use of artificial intelligence, or AI, technology.
The announcement came the same day that OpenAI—the company behind ChatGPT—unveiled a new tool called Sora that can generate a minute-long video from a written prompt, raising new concerns about how the technology might be abused to create deepfakes videos of real people doing or saying things they did not in fact do or say.
"Sooner or later, we need to adapt to the fact that realism is no longer a marker of authenticity," Princeton University computer science professor Arvind Narayanan told The Washington Post in response to Sora's emergence.
"Today's proposed rules to ban the use of AI tools from impersonating individuals are an important change to existing regulations and will help to protect consumers from AI generated scams."
For its part, the FTC is mostly concerned about how technology can be used to fool consumers. In its announcement, the commission said that it had introduced the new rule for public comment because it had been getting a growing number of complaints about impersonation-based fraud, which has generated a "public outcry."
"Emerging technology—including AI-generated deepfakes—threatens to turbocharge this scourge, and the FTC is committed to using all of its tools to detect, deter, and halt impersonation fraud," the commission said.
The proposed rule comes the same day as the FTC finalized a rule giving it the ability to seek financial compensation from scammers who impersonate companies or the government and builds on that regulation.
"Fraudsters are using AI tools to impersonate individuals with eerie precision and at a much wider scale. With voice cloning and other AI-driven scams on the rise, protecting Americans from impersonator fraud is more critical than ever," FTC Chair Lina Khan said in a statement. "Our proposed expansions to the final impersonation rule would do just that, strengthening the FTC's toolkit to address AI-enabled scams impersonating individuals."
The FTC also said that it wanted public comment on whether the rule should prohibit AI or other companies from knowingly allowing their products to be used by individuals who are in turn using them to commit fraud through impersonation.
Public Citizen, which has advocated for greater regulation of AI technology, welcomed the FTC's proposal.
"The FTC under Chair Kahn continues to be bold and use all the tools in their toolkit to protect consumers from emerging threats," Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen, said in a statement. "Today's proposed rules to ban the use of AI tools from impersonating individuals are an important change to existing regulations and will help to protect consumers from AI-generated scams."
OpenAI's preview of Sora raises the stakes in the debate surrounding AI regulation. So far, the technology is only being made available to certain professionals in film and the visual arts for feedback, as well as "red teamers—domain experts in areas like misinformation, hateful content, and bias"—to help assess risks, OpenAI said on social media.
"We'll be taking several important safety steps ahead of making Sora available in OpenAI's products," the company said.
One major concern surrounding deepfakes is that they could be used to manipulate voters in elections, including the upcoming 2024 presidential election in the U.S. The campaign of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, for example, raised alarms by using false images of former President Donald Trump embracing former White House Coronavirus Task Force chief Anthony Fauci in a video ad.
There are obvious errors in the Sora sample videos, as OpenAI acknowledged. Narayanan pointed out that a woman's right and left legs switch positions in a video of a Tokyo street, but also said that not every viewer might catch details like this and that the technology would likely be used to create harder-to-discredit deepfakes.
Another concern is the impact the technology could have on jobs and labor, especially in the arts. Director Michael Gracey, an expert on visual effects, told The Washington Post that the technology would likely enable a director to make an animated film on their own, instead of with a team of 100 to 200 people. The use of AI was a major sticking point in strikes by the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and Writers Guild of America last year, as Oxford Internet Institute visiting policy fellow Mutale Nkonde pointed out. Nkonde told the Post she also worried about the technology being used to dramatize hateful or violent prompts.
"From a policy perspective, do we need to start thinking about ways we can protect humans that should be in the loop when it comes to these tools?" Nkonde asked.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Pharmacists Refuse to Fill a Prescription for Disaster
They are walking out across the country for better working conditions and a commitment to increasing staffing levels needed to perform their job safely and effectively for the patients they serve.
Nov 15, 2023
Employees are staging walkouts at some of the biggest pharmacy retail chains in the country. A string of pharmacies closed at CVS in Kansas City. Later pharmacists held walkouts at Walgreens. More recently, an estimated 4,500 pharmacy workers from all three of the biggest chains, CVS, Walgreens and Rite Aid, announced participation.
#Pharmageddon is trending in nationwide protest. Pharmacy Guild, a new worker empowerment project, announced its efforts to unionize. With the recent news of the SAG-AFTRA strike ending, and the United Auto Workers declaring victory in new contracts, there is hope agreements can be made for resolution.
I worked as a community pharmacist early in my career more than 20 years ago. I dreaded times when I was alone in the pharmacy—every shift—haphazardly filling prescriptions while getting tied up on the phone adjudicating insurance claims, all the while running from one end of the pharmacy to another inputting, verifying, and dispensing prescriptions rapidly.
Every voice is needed to see positive legislation and improved conditions for pharmacies and to also encourage reform.
I was also answering doctor calls, attending to the drive-through, and hurriedly ringing up and counseling patients as fast as I could, without any help for half of my workday. Admittedly, I did not have the added stress of administering vaccinations while performing those duties at that time.
Pharmacy walkout momentum has been on the rise since 2021. Chronic understaffing coupled with higher prescription volume and growing additional duties exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic, with vaccinations and rapid test appointments, have led to unsafe working conditions for both employees and patients.
Additionally, abusive business practices by pharmacy benefit managers have not only resulted in thousands of pharmacy closures nationwide, but inflation in the amount paid for prescription drugs by seniors due to a loophole in Medicare regulations. According to Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services, retroactive direct and indirect remuneration fees have increased by 107,400% between 2010-2020.
To be sure, drugstore chains have been struggling over the years with rising competition from mail-order pharmacies and lower reimbursement rates for prescription drugs, leading to the elimination of multiple locations and bankruptcy filings.
However, the pharmacy closures are now leaving gaps in communities for medicines and essentials. An assessment of pharmacy closures revealed one in eight pharmacies closed from 2009-2015, with pharmacies located in low-income, urban areas at greater risk of closing. The closures can create pharmacy deserts, further worsening the problem of disparities and access.
Pharmacists are highly skilled and trained, obtaining six to eight years of formal education with an additional one to two more years for possible post-graduate training. They enter the workforce eager to use their expert drug knowledge and provide patient-centered care.
For many, the excitement quickly dissipates in a highly volatile, pressurized environment. Inadequate staffing and burnout are truly a prescription for disaster.
The American Pharmacists Association supports workplace safety and well-being. The American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy is also in solidarity to improve working conditions.
Unlike other union strikes by autoworkers and SAG-AFTRA members, pharmacists participating in the walkouts are not asking to increase their salary. They are asking for better working conditions and a commitment to increasing staffing levels needed to perform their job safely and effectively for the patients they serve.
They are asking to not have to put patients’ lives at risk every day. They are asking not to have to place their mental health and well-being at risk every day. They are asking for improved work-life balance and sustainable working conditions to keep patients safe.
They are asking retail employers to do the right thing and set realistic goals for performance with adequate resources and staffing in place. They are asking pharmacy benefit managers to do the right thing and stop the assessment of exorbitant direct and indirect remuneration fees on retail prescriptions that are pushing pharmacies out of business.
It is not too much to ask.
As of January 1, 2024, the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services issued a final rule eliminating Part D plans’ and pharmacy benefit managers’ use of retroactive direct and indirect remuneration fees.
However, the first half of 2024 will still come with cash flow challenges for pharmacies, high fees, and low point-of-sale reimbursement during the transition, in addition to retroactive fees from 2023. More actions are needed to stop pharmacy benefit managers’ harmful business practices.
Every voice is needed to see positive legislation and improved conditions for pharmacies and to also encourage reform. From policy makers to elected officials, advocates, healthcare professionals, funders, pharmacists, retailers, customers, and citizens, everyone needs to acknowledge this urgency and make changes.
Community pharmacists need help now.
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Four Months on Strike, Actors Reach 'Extraordinary' Tentative Deal With Hollywood Studios
"Workers stood up to Hollywood executives and held their ground to reach this agreement," said the president of the AFL-CIO. "ANYTHING is possible when we organize."
Nov 09, 2023
The union representing actors across the television and film industries announced late Wednesday that it reached a tentative contract deal with major studios, bringing to an end a monthslong strike that—combined with a simultaneous writers strike—shut down much of Hollywood's production.
In a statement, the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) said the contract agreement is valued at over $1 billion and has "extraordinary scope," including significant pay increases, "unprecedented provisions for consent and compensation that will protect members from the threat of AI," and a "streaming participation bonus."
The tentative deal also includes pension and healthcare improvements and compensation boosts for background performers, according to SAG-AFTRA.
The union said full details of the tentative agreement—which must be ratified by members—won't be released until it is reviewed by the SAG-AFTRA National Board.
"We also thank our union siblings—the workers that power this industry—for the sacrifices they have made while supporting our strike and that of the Writers Guild of America," SAG-AFTRA added. "We stand together in solidarity and will be there for you when you need us. Thank you all for your dedication, your commitment, and your solidarity throughout this strike. It is because of YOU that these improvements became possible."
The tentative agreement was announced days after SAG-AFTRA rejected what the Hollywood studios described as their "last, best, and final offer" over a so-called "zombie" clause that critics said would allow studios to use the AI likenesses of dead actors without consent. It's unclear exactly how or whether that language was changed in the tentative agreement.
With a contract deal in hand after the longest strike in its history—nearly four months—SAG-AFTRA formally suspended the work stoppage just after midnight on Thursday and announced that "all picket locations are closed."
Dear #SagAftraMembers:
We are thrilled & proud to tell you that today your TV/Theatrical Negotiating Committee voted unanimously to approve a tentative agreement with the AMPTP. As of 12:01 a.m. PT on Nov. 9, our strike is officially suspended & all picket locations are closed. pic.twitter.com/FhvSRJQXFE
— SAG-AFTRA (@sagaftra) November 9, 2023
The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), which represents the studios, said in a statement that the tentative agreement "gives SAG-AFTRA the biggest contract-on-contract gains in the history of the union, including the largest increase in minimum wages in the last forty years; a brand new residual for streaming programs; extensive consent and compensation protections in the use of artificial intelligence; and sizable contract increases on items across the board."
"The AMPTP is pleased to have reached a tentative agreement and looks forward to the industry resuming the work of telling great stories," the statement added.
The SAG-AFTRA strike came to a close weeks after Hollywood writers reached a deal to end their work stoppage after nearly 150 days. Writers Guild of America members ratified the agreement last month.
Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, applauded SAG-AFTRA's tentative deal, writing on social media that "workers stood up to Hollywood executives and held their ground to reach this agreement."
"The SAG-AFTRA actors and performing artists showed the world the true power of collective action," Shuler wrote. "ANYTHING is possible when we organize."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Nightmare Scenario': Actors Union Rejects Studio Offer Over AI 'Zombie Clause'
"It's the cheap, dark future studios want," said one television writer. "Right now, SAG-AFTRA is the only thing preventing it. And they're fighting like hell."
Nov 07, 2023
Negotiations between the world's largest labor union representing screen performers and some of the most powerful studios in Hollywood were set to resume on Tuesday after union negotiators announced that they had rejected the companies' "last, best, and final offer," arguing that the terms did not include sufficient artificial intelligence protections for highly-paid actors.
The latest offer included language that would have cascading negative effects on the entire entertainment industry, said supporters of the ongoing actors' strikes.
The negotiating committee of the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), including chief negotiator Duncan Crabtree-Ireland and union president Fran Drescher, told the union's 160,000 members Monday evening that they were "determined to secure the right deal and thereby bring this strike to an end responsibly." The union began a work stoppage on July 13 after more than a month of negotiations regarding residual pay, AI, and other issues.
The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers' (AMPTP) supposed "final" offer included a requirement that studios and streaming services pay to make AI images with the likeness of highly-paid "Schedule F" performers, who earn more than the minimum for series regulars ($32,000 per TV episode) and feature films ($60,000).
But SAG-AFTRA is also demanding a provision that would require compensation for the re-use of AI scans and one that would require companies to secure consent from a deceased actors' estate to use an AI scan of them.
The language in the AMPTP's offer was derided as the "zombie" clause by television writer David Slack, who called the studios' proposal "a nightmare scenario" that would play out like an episode of the dystopian series Black Mirror.
While the clause pertains to highly paid actors, Slack noted that it would ultimately impact thousands of people who work across the entertainment industry, as the studios' goal appears to be gaining the ability to produce films and television without paying the actors who appear in them.
"The AMPTP's zombie clause also means less money for talent agents and managers—as performers making a good living right now are suddenly scanned once, given one check, and then sent home forever," said Slack. "And who is going to pay the publicists, PR firms, event managers, and press junket journalists for TV and movie premieres—when they start releasing shows where all the 'actors' were either not involved in the 'filming' or are already dead?"
Before the Writers Guild of America secured a deal that was ratified in October, ending the writers' strike after nearly five months, the union also refused to accept an AMPTP offer that was presented as its "best and final."
"The AMPTP tried their 'Last, Best, and Final' trick—and the SAG-AFTRA [negotiating committee] didn't blink," said Slack. "This is how you win."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy