Netflix allegedly featured altered images in "What Jennifer Did," evident from anomalies like distorted hands and artifacts often associated with AI manipulation.
This underscores significant ethical dilemmas surrounding the utilization of such images in documentaries.
It was a violent crime that shook a quiet Canadian town: Mysterious intruders break into the home of Vietnamese immigrants, terrorize the family, and leave a traumatized daughter as the only witness. (Photo: Netflix)
Use of AI in True-Crime Documentaries
Netflix's true crime documentary "What Jennifer Did" has sparked controversy amid allegations of using AI-generated imagery to portray a real individual. The reported use of manipulated visuals, including distorted hands and peculiar artifacts, has raised ethical concerns regarding the authenticity and integrity of the documentary.
Futurism reported that this revelation not only prompts scrutiny of Netflix's editorial choices but also underscores broader questions about the ethical implications of employing AI-generated content in documentary filmmaking.
Moreover, the fact that the depicted individual is currently incarcerated and awaiting retrial adds another layer of complexity to the debate, highlighting the potential impact of such imagery on the public perception and legal proceedings.
In one disturbing picture, Jennifer Pan, the main subject of the documentary, appears with a severely distorted left hand, and another image reveals an odd gap in her cheek.
The images clearly indicate manipulation and were not identified as AI-generated.
The AI might be using genuine photos of Pan as a basis for generating the images. However, the concern is that the images produced could potentially introduce bias rather than objectively representing the facts of the case.
The platform utilized the images to portray her as "bubbly, happy, confident, and very genuine," according to her high school friend Nam Nguyen.
AI's Role in Depicting Real Individuals
Certainly, employing generative AI to depict a real individual in a true-crime documentary is likely to spark concerns. Instances of companies using fictional, AI-generated content as props have surfaced before.
For instance, a recent episode of HBO's "True Detective" showcased peculiar, AI-generated posters in the background. However, relying on this technology to produce images of an actual person, especially someone currently incarcerated and not eligible for parole until around 2040, should prompt significant apprehension.
This isn't about creating a made-up story just for entertainment. It's about altering the facts of a real-life event, which happened as it is, by tampering with reality itself.
The Canadian Court of Appeal mandated Pan's retrial due to insufficient jury options presented by the trial judge, according to CBC. Critic Karen K. HO labeled the Netflix documentary as part of the "true crime industrial complex," satisfying an insatiable hunger for violent content.
Netflix's potential use of AI-altered imagery could bolster this argument. While regulations on AI use exist in the US, Europe, and other regions, there are no specific laws governing AI-generated images or videos in documentaries or other media content.
Related Article : Global Screenwriters' Guilds Crackdown on AI Training Data with Calls for Stricter Licensing
