How YouTube Plans to Implement AI ‘Responsibly’
By Movieguide® Contributor
With all the controversy surrounding AI, The Guardian interviewed Alison Lomax, YouTube’s London Chief, to understand the major video platform’s plan for the technology.
“We’re committed to embracing AI in a bold way,” Lomax told The Guardian. “But we have to do it really responsibly.” The focus is currently on “protecting artists’ integrity and creative expression.”
Lomax “says a project with Universal to create an incubator for artists to research AI’s potential shows the ‘strength of the partnership’ with the music industry,” The Guardian said.
New YouTube principles mention the site’s plans to “evolve together” with the music industry. Most of the guidelines aren’t hammered out, but YouTube chiefs have decided what the priorities are.
Essentially, the site aims to welcome AI conscientiously, protect creators’ rights and keep things safe, which includes shutting down harmful videos that may be manipulated by AI.
Lomax said, “[AI] is the buzz word of the year, but it’s been part of what we are doing for many years.”
“YouTube, launched in 2005, is no stranger to AI: it is used in its recommendation algorithm; to moderate content; and, latterly, for automatic language translation,” The Guardian wrote.
Breaking News reported, “Ms Lomax said YouTube has been using AI since 2017, including to help develop content moderation in the battle against misinformation, something that is becoming increasingly important in the area of health and in particular ahead of upcoming elections in the US and UK.”
Movieguide® recently reported on the viral AI-generated song “Heart on My Sleeve”:
Grammy CEO Harvey Mason Jr. has retracted his previous statement that an AI-generated song would be eligible for a Grammy nomination, now clarifying that it would not.
“Heart on My Sleeve,” created by an anonymous artist called Ghostwriter, clones Drake’s and The Weeknd’s vocals.
‘As far as the creative side, it’s absolutely eligible because it was written by a human,’ Mason said in early September.
He recently clarified his statement, emphasizing that the song is not eligible for a Grammy. He didn’t indicate any conflict with how the song was made but only with legal technicalities.
‘I’m sorry, but I have to clear up some of this bad and really inaccurate information that’s starting to float around,’ Mason said. ‘…Let me be extra, extra clear: even though it was written by a human creator, the vocals were not legally obtained, the vocals were not cleared by the label or the artists, and the song is not commercially available, and because of that, it’s not eligible.’
- Content: +1Share:
- Content: +1