The Guide #97: Is AI an existential threat to culture? And other reader questions

This week we’re opening up the Guide mailbag to answer your pressing (or not-so-pressing) questions about popular culture, from the perils of AI to the bizarre practice of watching shows sped-up. Thanks to everyone who emailed in – these are always fun, so we’ll definitely attempt another one in the coming months.

***

Does AI represent an existential threat to pop culture as we know it? Will we look back on Before and After AI – or is the soul of pop culture too rooted in humanity to have any fear? – Joe Jenkins

A topic so big that it would probably require about 100 ChatGPT-written newsletters to adequately get to the bottom of it. But … I think it’s basically guaranteed that we’ll look back on pop culture as Before and After AI, just as we do with the pre and post-internet eras. The fact that AI was such a major sticking point in the breakdown of negotiations that led to the actors’ strike tells you just how transformative Hollywood thinks it will be. And for all the limitations of the technology right now (Exhibit A, m’lord: the laughable-slash-disturbing AI-generated Heidi trailer, pictured above) there’s no doubt that it is already changing pop-culture – Indy’s de-aged face is testament to that.

AI doesn’t have to represent an existential threat to pop culture. It could be a remarkable tool for creative people, helping them realise their wildest, biggest ideas. But technology is often only as good as the people using it and … well, have you seen some of the cynical, craven types currently running our pop-cultural industries?!

At worst AI could hasten our current race to the bottom. A technology that works based on the existing information it is fed seems terrifyingly well-suited to a culture that prizes the safe and familiar: an obsession with existing IP, endless sequels, familiar structures, beats, rhythms. The reason the actors are so animated by AI is that they can imagine a world where studios recycle their likenesses or voices without adequately compensating them. But even with compensation that’s still a depressing prospect: will film stars sign their likenesses away, like musicians have with their back catalogues, so that films can endlessly generate sequels and reboots after they’ve gone? Will record labels do the same with those back catalogues? And what of the all the work of artists, musicians and the like that has already been fed into ChatGPT, Midjourney et al without compensation or even recognition?

This of course is the worst-case scenario and I do have optimism for our collective capacity to want something new (as seen in the superhero fatigue currently affecting cinema). But making sure AI is a net positive for the arts will require vigilance, and a fair few lawsuits. Still, when it comes to the dangers of AI, bad pop culture probably isn’t quite as much a concern as, well, all of humanity dropping dead at once.

***

Why is it so hard to find out when albums are being released these days? It feels like a medium we’re not on top of any more. – Sophie B

The simple answer, Sophie, is that it’s not really as much of a priority for record labels that you listen to an album on the day, or even the week it comes out, any more. Given streaming’s long tail, labels are pretty confident that you’ll encounter an album sooner or later, so those old months-long promotional campaigns that would culminate in release day seem less essential (not to mention, pricey). Granted, some labels and acts – notably older, indier acts such as Mogwai or Gary Numan (pictured above) – do still value the old way of working, and the potential of a high chart placing that comes with getting your fans to stream/buy an album the week it comes out, but things have definitely shifted.

Additionally, it doesn’t help that the surprise or short-notice album release is still with us (despite reports of its demise), which further muddies the waters when it comes to knowing about releases in advance. And of course the demise of the music press means that there are far fewer publications to tell you when an album is coming out. But there are still some places that do: Metacritic, Pitchfork and Billboard all publish regularly updated lists of upcoming albums on their sites. And, if all else fails, streaming platforms like Spotify will at least notify you of a new release by a band or artist you like.

***

A recent YouGov survey found that 27% of people at least sometimes use the speed-up function when watching streamed shows. Who are these people, and is this a crime against good content? – Richard Hamilton

I too am baffled by the trend of sped-up TV, Richard. Sped-up podcasts I can just about understand – even if the experience of listening to a host at a slightly higher pitch and faster pace is unsettlingly like watching the Sinn Féin helium sketch from The Day Today. But with sped-up TV and film, you also have to contend with the visuals moving faster too. Suddenly all those grand, atmospheric moments in films look a bit absurd: the horror jump-scare loses all the tension of its build-up; Aaron Sorkin’s walk-and-talks become walk-and-jogs; the slow cowboy walk becomes a constipated waddle. Everything turns into a Benny Hill sketch, basically.

Netflix, those great disrupters, were naturally the first streamer to incorporate the speed up/slow down setting. These days they offer two sped-up options: one at 1.25x speed, and one at 1.5x speed. I just tried watching an episode of the madcap, misanthropic sitcom It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia (pictured above) on the sped-up settings. The 1.5x speed is a non-starter: dialogue whizzes by in a blur, and it feels like you’re fast-forwarding through an old VHS. But even the 1.25x setting feels completely unwatchable to me: the rhythms of the jokes – the pauses before punchlines, the slowing down and speeding up of dialogue – are completely butchered, and the relentlessness of the fast-paced yammering is headache-inducing.

The argument for sped-up TV, as articulated in this piece from the i, is as a time-saving method – why waste hours sitting through all those mediocre TV shows when you can whiz through them instead. To which the obvious answer would be: stop watching mediocre shows. But I do sympathise a little: TV viewers are completists, after all. But, if you really do want to slog through that subpar series, there’s a better solution than reaching the sped-up button: just have it on in the background when you’re doing household chores – or, if you’re like me, scrolling through Twitter in a semi-zombified state.

If you want to read the complete version of this newsletter please subscribe to receive The Guide in your inbox every Friday.