Taylor Swift's alleged AI use is a rare creative misstep

I'm the absolute last person who wants to join the Taylor Swift pile on that's flooding the internet right now (the new album is joyful, FYI), but it wouldn't be fair of me to withhold comment on the AI allegations being levelled right now.

In the wake of Taylor's new album, The Life of a Showgirl, a scavenger hunt was launched across the globe, with fans searching for orange doors in 12 major cities – and each one has an accompanying video unlocked via QR code.

It is a an incredible feat of marketing and demonstrates just how enormous her brand is – but there was a big problem. The videos shared on the internet have more than a whiff of generative AI (just like with those Sabrina Carpenter images). And for such a powerhouse brand promoting a major release, this is unacceptable. Surely Taylor could have afforded to hire real designers to put together these assets?

This album launch has had one of the biggest brand strategies ever, for any new release across any industry. From multiple album variants and a huge social campaign to an actual movie release party we think could be the future of cinema, Taylor has hit every mark in energising Swifties worldwide. While (as ever) there has been a joyfulness to the connectedness felt in the fan community, some of the plays have clearly been financially driven, and that makes supposed AI assets feel exceptionally icky when coming from such a wealthy brand.

It's also surprising because the The Life of a Showgirl movie contains sections that show the making of a music video (The Fate of Ophelia) and the standout takeaway is you can see how on top of the creative process Taylor is personally. The video involves lavish handmade sets and costumes with an incredible attention to detail – and the control and perfectionism shown by Taylor and her team is apparent throughout the production. So to allow video with such low quality AI signifiers to come through in these assets is not in line with the quality put out in the rest of the album's ecosystem.

Sure, the gen AI videos are a part of the campaign that feels like an add-on, and not the main component. But they come together to create an overall creative narrative, they are designed to be viral content and ultimately to push album sales, so I would expect a brand as big as this to have a higher bar and enthusiastically pay real designers to make their designs. There's a place for AI in many creative workflows now, but raw final output should not be one of them unless you're an amateur who wouldn't be paying a real designer anyway.

And as well as the implications for designers' salaries, it wasn't a great brand decision for the optics. The videos have been taken down from YouTube now, but not before the internet noticed – and now news is flooded with these allegations. Someone should have seen this coming and thought a bit harder about it.