Requires at least 3 articles from traditionally reputable news organizations reporting that some U.S. actors have lost income, job security, or hiring velocity as a result of AI-based automation.
I won't be proactively searching for such articles - I will need to come across them organically or they can be posted in the comments / sent to me via Twitter message or other DM.
Related questions
Not new, but wondering if Fortune counts as reputable.
Will 'extras' count? Like, crowds of people in the background being filled in by AI instead of hired? I think maybe that shouldn't count, and it should have to be more stringent. Maybe something like 'a movie has fewer named actors because some roles that could have been were instead filled by AI' or something like that.
@NathanHelmBurger articles about extras losing work en masse would count (obviously still depending on the situation). Maybe they aren't headline actors but I think they still fall into the same actor umbrella.
@Scoop Do market participants think that voice actors should count? And do market participants find Stealth Optional to be a "traditionally reputable" news organization?
I tend to think yes to the first question and no to the second. It seems like a gaming-focused online magazine - I wouldn't call it traditionally reputable. But I could potentially be convinced.
The language in the second one doesn't seem direct / strong enough to merit review.