Good luck limiting AI slop in YouTube land

Rational Sheep have more and more choices, good and bad, in the digital marketplace

I was surprised recently when the algorithm gods pointed me — after I spent several days watching news and commentary about the Charlie Kirk assassination — to a new tribute song in honor of the Turning Point USA leader.

OK, I wasn’t expecting Lady Gaga to release something like “Goodbye My Friend (A Tribute To Charlie Kirk).”

But this wasn’t a tribute to Kirk, it was actually Lady Gaga’s heartfelt farewell to the great singer Tony Bennett — pasted on top of an AI-generated flood of images of Kirk. But, hey, at least it was Lady Gaga singing (I think), instead of “Lady Gaga.”

Alas, the same algorithms pointed me to “Ed Sheeran” and a “song” called “Rest In Peace, Charlie Kirk.”

This is not to be confused with the “official music video” of " superstar Adelle singing “Rest In Peace.” Oh, and consumers can choose to click a YouTube clip with Sheeran and Adelle performing a duet version of “Rest In Peace Charlie Kirk” — no comma this time. Maybe you would prefer Sheeran doing that song while backed by the band Imagine Dragons?

If you want a “Titanic” anthem vibe, you may tune in Celine Dion performing “Forever in Our Hearts, Charlie.” This is not to be confused with a second “tribute” by Dion called “Charlie, This Goodbye Hurts,” which is not to be confused (I’m repeating myself) with another called “Goodbye.”

Maybe you would prefer “Eminem” rapping a Kirk tribute called “Home with the Lord.” Really?

But for the total AI experience, you could (I do not advise this) watch Barron Trump and Erika Kirk “singing” an emotional duet for Charlie Kirk — with the performance taking place in heaven. Where did the AI programs find voices to morph into the fake singers “Barron Trump” and “Erika Kirk”?

What’s the point here?

Yes, I am worried about the crazy and even sickening things that can be done with AI.

But the topic of this post isn’t AI, alone. I am still worried about the economics of the YouTube marketplace — where consumers have all kinds of good choices, but a rising tide of terrible choices. The later includes what the experts call “AI slop,” including waves of fake content (Yes, some digital artists can use AI to produce new forms of popular art) that steal untold amounts of advertising dollars from real performers. At the very least, real artists — Sheeran, Lady Gaga, Adelle, etc. — need to be able to prevent computers from stealing their voices.

How do these videos remain online? Hold that thought.

I am old enough to remember that, back in the early Internet days, some experts — George Gilder, for example — were optimistic about what would happen when new musical artists, journalists, comedians and other content creators could monetize their talents online without having to bend their knees to giant corporations.

There would, you see, be new pathways into the entertainment and news marketplace.

The bottom line: Viewers would have more choices and would be able to pick programs that appealed to their specific interests (even their “higher angels”), instead of the same old, same old shows from legacy networks and cable channels. I think about that vision whenever I watch something new from the Symbolic World channel created by the iconographer and commentator Jonathan Pageau.

Yes, the entertainment and news giants would still have more money to pour into programming, but at least new talents would have a chance to reach new audiences.

However, we also need to pause and recognize that YouTube and other online platforms do allow consumers to choose myriad new forms of digital demons, as well.

Remember this: All of God’s creation is both glorious and fallen. The Internet offers us “higher” choices, but plenty of “lower” ones as well.

However, there is no way around the fact that more and more people are choosing to make choices via YouTube, as opposed to traditional networks. Ask the executives who write salary checks for Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel and Jimmy Fallon about what that means.

Here is a recent overview from Yahoo! News:

YouTube’s streak as TV’s top media distributor continued in July, with the company capturing 13.4% of TV viewing. The company established its largest lead to date over its streaming and legacy media competitors since Nielsen began first tracking in November 2023.

Disney stayed in second place at 9.4%, while Netflix jumped to 8.8% in July –rounding out the top three for the second consecutive month.

There are millions or billions of dollars at stake. It’s easy to see why some people — backed with emerging AI programs — want to get their hands on lots of that loot.

The basic idea is this: Fake AI content is posted on AI created “channels,” which are then inflated with zillions of fake clicks by “viewers” that are actually AI programs, that can even be tweaked to create fake viewer comments. All of that AI activity then punches digital buttons that point streams of real digital advertising dollars into the bank accounts of the people using these AI programs.

Oh, can the people at YouTube create AI programs that are smart enough to draw red lines between real content on their platform and the new AI slop? Consider this: How good is your smartphone at detecting spam texts? How often do you receive spam emails that beat the computer filters and, thus, manage to appear in your inbox?

I found this National Public Radio feature helpful: “‘AI slop’ videos may be annoying, but they’re racking up views — and ad money.” The piece includes quotes from one Mark Lawrence Garilao, who creates AI videos about, well, kittens. He is convinced that he is simply creating a new form of entertainment.

Garilao is a 21-year-old college student … reached by phone in the Philippines, where he studies computer science. He said he produces one or two clips a day, all with a similar theme revolving around the kitten and his father. Each takes one or two hours to produce, using ChatGPT to render the characters, KlingAI to create video, and other software to edit.

“When I think of the story or what the dialogue would be, I would just — I would just sit there and think of a random one, which I find funny. That’s it,” he said.

It’s mostly for entertainment, he said. But there’s also good money in it. YouTube owner Google pays channel owners through its AdSense program based on the number of people who watch the videos and see ads.

“The highest I made was in the month of May. I made $9,000 in just one month,” Garilao said. For perspective, that adds up to more than a year’s salary in the kind of entry-level job he said he can expect when he graduates.

Other channels churn out videos at a much higher rate, hoping to cash in on views.

Not only can AI professionals create new forms of content, they can embed subtle symbols that fake out the platform’s computers and send even more dollars their way.

Garilao says his payday in May was supercharged because he added “Italian brainrot” meme characters to his cat videos. These are popular AI-generated characters, like Ballerina Cappuccina, a dancer with a coffee cup for a head, and Tralalero Tralala, a shark wearing Nike sneakers.

Social media platforms are recognizing the challenge of the onslaught of so much AI-generated content. But they aren’t necessarily banning it outright.

TikTok and Instagram are now labeling certain AI-generated content. Meta says it allows AI-generated content that meets community standards, and lets users personalize their Facebook feed and shape their experience on Instagram to avoid things they don’t want to see. TikTok says it has rules against AI deepfakes.

Riiiiiiiigggghhhhhhttttt. That’s the ticket.

Alas, let’s assume that many YouTube and Instagram users do not have teens or young adults living in their homes who can help them “personalize” the settings on all of these programs that will help block the “slop”?

Now, you may be thinking: Who cares if we are exposed to fake kittens and AI versions of superstar singers performing AI composed songs about real people and real events in our world? Maybe we will start worrying when AI porn leaks into our lives featuring fake images of people we care about.

But what about fake messages from the new pope?

If you follow religion news, you may know that Pope Leo XIV is very concerned about the impact of AI on people around the world. A recent Agence France-Presse feature noted that the Vatican has reasons to worry about fake ecclesiastical slop. Why?

… Hundreds of fabricated [Leo] sermons and speeches, in English and Spanish, underscore how easily hoaxes created using artificial intelligence can elude detection and dupe viewers.

“There’s natural interest in what the new pope has to say, and people don’t yet know his stance and style,” said University of Washington professor emeritus Oren Etzioni, founder of TrueMedia.org, a nonprofit focused on fighting deepfakes. “A perfect opportunity to sow mischief with AI-generated misinformation.”

Let’s keep reading for more details:

After AFP presented YouTube with 26 channels posting predominantly AI-generated pope content, the platform terminated 16 of them for violating its policies against spam, deceptive practices and scams, and another for violating YouTube’s terms of service. …

The company also booted an additional six pages from its partner program allowing creators to monetize their content.

TikTok similarly removed 11 accounts that AFP pointed out -- with over 1.3 million combined followers -- citing the platform’s policies against impersonation, harmful misinformation and misleading AI-generated content of public figures.

With names such as “Pope Leo XIV Vision,” the social media pages portrayed the pontiff supposedly offering a flurry of warnings and lessons he never preached.

But disclaimers annotating their use of AI were often hard to find -- and sometimes nonexistent.

Oh, maybe you are more interested in politics or human-interest stories, as opposed to AI slop about the leader of the world’s largest Christian flock?

If you follow political commentary that includes the word “Trump,” then the algorithms may have sent you some variation on the above AI feature. Here is an MSN.com report on that viral video:

Taija PerryCook, a reporter for Snopes, pointed out that the video appeared on the Elite Stories YouTube channel with a disclaimer about the channel’s content only posting fictional stories.

“The stories presented on this channel are entirely fictional and crafted solely for entertainment. Any resemblance to real events, individuals, or situations is purely coincidental and unintentional. These narratives are not intended to depict, reference, or represent any actual occurrences, persons, or entities,” the disclaimer read. …

Even after Snopes debunked the claim, YouTuber users commented on the video praising Barron Trump and his parents.

“From a Army Veteran, Thank you Barron your Grandfather is watching and is so proud,” wrote one user.

“What a wonderful respectfully taught young man. Taught well by his parents ❤ God Bless this young man,” wrote another.

“What a lovely honorable young man,” commented another.

“His entire family loves America, all Americans......Thank you to all the Trump family.....27yr USAF Veteran,” another commented.

In other words, legions of online viewers are being faked out by AI slop. Look at the glowing comments on these videos. I think we can assume that some of these comments are from real people. Maybe.

The fake information is bad enough, but let me state, again, that the AI-slop videos aim streams of advertising revenue away from real artists and commentators who are attempting to use YouTube and other platforms to build their brands and careers.

All of this makes my head hurt. How about you? Please leave some comments about the AI material that is beginning to affect your lives.

By the way, no AI programs were used to create the material in this post, unless you include search engines. You can tell that I’m real, since my aging hands produce way too many typos.