by Emma Smith, Assistant Editor
Last year, representatives of the National Association of Voice Actors (NAVA) and SAG-AFTRA came to San Diego Comic Con in the midst of a strike as studios and talent battled it out over how artificial intelligence will affect the entertainment industry. This year is no different. At SDCC 2024, Lindsay Rousseau, Tim Friedlander, JP Karliak, Carin Gilfry, Matthew “Reazon” Parham, and Scott Mortman appeared on the AI in Entertainment: The Threat to Performers and Writers Panel and at a press conference where they answered questions.
As SDCC was beginning, the actors under the SAG-AFTRA Interactive Media Agreement, who most know as video game actors, were going on strike. The agreement covers both those who provide the voices for video games and those who provide the physical movements on which the actions are based. Just as when the more well-known sections of SAG-AFTRA were on strike, a vital part of the agreement is ownership and use of the performances of these actors.
The strike began after 18 months of negotiation. The studios have balked at including protections from generative A.I.. Studio heads have expressed a desire to carve out certain aspects of the creation of video games as “not performative,” such as the work of performers who provide the mapped body movement used to create the characters. They would put performers under contracts where they can feed their body or voice performance into A.I. to train A.I. to create future projects. There is some promising developments in the industry for those on strike. Many indie game developers have signed intermin agreements with SAG-AFTRA, allowing for the continuation of projects. NAVA offers a free service to interested companies to aid them in converting projects to union. Those interested can find information here: https://navavoices.org/strike-info-ima-video-games-2024/
You may ask yourself why should you care about this strike – maybe you aren’t even a video game player. But this strike could have consequences beyond this corner of the industry, as our society struggles to define how A.I. fits into entertainment. A.I. generated content is really a loop, feeding content back to us in a different form with little regard for it’s origin. Programs created by a disproportionately white and male workforce (and bosses) decide what kind of “voice” a character should have. This amplifies stereotypes and torpedoes the diversity of characters that modern video games have brought us.
Consider that due to their medium, voice actors are the most geographically diverse type of performer. This allows projects to draw on a larger pool of authentic voices, seeking out performers with regional accents and vernacular, different gender identities and sexual orientations, and different races and ethnicities. Wouldn’t we all prefer that what a “gay man” sounds like come from an actual gay man? And that Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffanys not be a model for a “Japanese” accent? Yet in a survey of voice actors performed by NAVA, 12% of performers had knowingly lost a job to A.I.. Of that 12%, 80% were performers of color.
So were does that leave us, the consumers of entertainment. Ask yourself this question: how closely did you read the terms and conditions of YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, etc? Is your voice yours once it hits those platforms? Is your face? You can find more information about the SAG-AFTRA strike at https://www.sagaftra.org/contracts-industry-resources/contracts/interactive-media-video-game-strike. However, if those questions concern you, it may be time to consider what your state and/or national representatives are or are not doing when it comes to passing laws covering A.I.. In the US for example, there is not general protection for your voice and face. Only recently has Congress passed a law forbidding the use of deep fake pornography (the DEFIANCE Act). One cynically wonders if they would have been as enthusiastic to pass those protections if it wasn’t something that affected them so personally. This still leaves open so much potential for A.I. fakes and fraud to affect people.
When it comes to the things that make up you, the cardinal rules should be the three CCCs:
- compensation for its use (2) active consent to its use and (3) control over its use.
I advise you to accept nothing less. And for those in the U.S., keep this in mind when you vote in November. Look at your ballot and ask yourself – who do you think is more likely to protect you.
Please take a moment to FOLLOW & SUBSCRIBE to our updated ComicsOnline social channels.
We appreciate your support!
INSTAGRAM – COMICSONLINE
BSKY – COMICSONLINE
YOUTUBE – COMICSONLINE
FACEBOOK – COMICSONLINE
TWITTER / X – COMICSONLINE
Stay tuned to ComicsOnline for more exclusive SDCC interviews, reviews, giveaways, and everything geek pop culture!
