The Future of Tech and the Danger of Robot Influencers
*Originally submitted November 14th, 2018 for the New Media and Changing Communities course at DIS Copenhagen
The rapid advancement of technology has been thrilling to watch in recent years. Cars drive themselves, self-operating machines assist with surgeries, and cellphones have become pocket-sized personal assistants. This is all incredible; but there is something terrifying about watching more and more people be replaced by machines every day. While medicine and automobiles seem to naturally gravitate towards technological advancements, the blogosphere seems like an odd place for this sort of technology. Social media “influencers” are a relatively new phenomenon, but even they are being replaced with robots and augmented reality software. The creation of Instagram models like Miquela, Bermuda, and Blawko enters a new realm of ethics within technology. These self-described robots are not saving lives or increasing productivity; rather, they are modeling for brands like Prada and Kenzo and releasing hit singles. Technology becomes dangerous when it is used to create seemingly autonomous individuals with their own opinions and beliefs, especially in a space that has so much power and influence over a young and impressionable audience.
Upon stumbling across the Instagram profile of Miquela, (@lilmiquela), one cannot be sure what they are looking at. At first glance, she looks like every other influencer, boasting expensive brands and candid pictures with her friends. But look a little closer, and the freckles on her face seem too perfect. Her hair is always in the same style, her signature “space buns”. The gap between her perfectly white front teeth seems a little too intentional. And it is. Miquela, along with her “robot friends” Bermuda (@bermudaisbae) and Ronald Blawko (@blawko22), were created by a Silicon Valley company called Brud. Beyond this, there really isn’t much else about Brud online. They are purposefully elusive, in the hopes of making their creations appear more autonomous. Google’s latest technology, Google Duplex, recently sparked a debate about features used to enhance user experience versus features used for deception. A governing technology body in the United Kingdom created a specific standard for this, which “explicitly names identity deception as a societal risk, and warns that such an approach will eventually erode trust in the technology.” Companies should not “try and pass [their] bot off as a human; [they] need to make it really clear it’s a robot.” Miquela and her posse fully disclose that they are robots, but it is unclear what their actual purpose is. There is no “user experience” element, per say. There is no real necessity for them to appear so lifelike. Because there is so little information on Brud, there is no way to know if these creations are a pastime, a social experiment, an advanced form of AI, or something entirely different. Without knowing Brud’s intentions, Miquela and her fellow robots seem much more deceptive than useful.
Another recent tech controversy centers around “deepfakes”, a practice that uses technology to alter speech in videos. This technology has been used to make it seem as if former President Obama is insulting current President Trump, and has been widely used to insert celebrities into pornography. Deepfakes are intended to deceive, and can be dangerous when used by the wrong people. Actor Jordan Peele, speaking through President Obama, warns the audience, “How we move forward in the age of information is going to be the difference between whether we survive or whether we become some kind of f---ed up dystopia.” While Miquela, Bermuda and Blawko do not “speak” very often, whoever is running their social media accounts does have the ability to make them say whatever they want. Miquela uses her platform to encourage people to vote and advocates for many positive movements and causes, but Bermuda and Blawko tend to use rather crude language, and Bermuda used to be an avid Trump supporter. With nearly 2 million followers between the three of them, these robots have a significant amount of influence and a very large platform to preach whatever beliefs and opinions their creators desire. With Instagram having such a young, impressionable audience, this responsibility should be taken seriously.
Robots aside, it is difficult to tell if anyone on Instagram is 100% real. FaceTune, VSCO, Afterlight, and Photoshop exist to allow users to edit and filter themselves however they please. Don’t like that freckle on your face? Get rid of it. Want to look slimmer? FaceTune yourself. Human influencers edit themselves to appear different or “better”, so there really is no telling what is authentic on Instagram. This culture is dangerous when it comes to young peoples’ self- esteem and self-image. Is that person really perfect, or did they just edit themselves to look like that? Andy Clark in the New York Times asserts that we are living in “a world permeated by a growing swath of alien intelligences. All this blurs the boundaries between body and machine, between mind and world, between standard, augmented and virtual realities, and between human and post-human.” Today, humans look like robots, and robots look like humans. Take it one step further, and these robots are wearing designer brands and hanging out with A-list celebrities. They exist in a world where they can travel anywhere, afford anything, and meet anyone; there are no limitations. These are impossible standards. Miquela’s followers will most likely never be able to walk in New York Fashion Week, or make a song and music video with Baauer, or have a billboard in Times Square or a spread in Vogue magazine. The consequences of this all- powerful super-influencer seem to be overwhelmingly negative for both real-life models and influencers who could lose their jobs to robots, and for fans and audience members who cannot live up to these impossible standards.
The question ultimately lies in Brud’s perceived responsibility over this project. Increasingly, major innovators in the tech industry are moving away from the technologies they helped create, because they have contributed to the attention economy. The rise of the so-called “attention economy” privileges “what is sensational over what is nuanced, appealing to emotion, anger and outrage.”4 Reactions to creations like Miquela have been mixed; people are afraid, fascinated, obsessed. No one knows what to do with this technology that seemingly has no purpose other than to entertain and exist as spectacle. Brud, whoever they may be, must recognize the potential implications of their project, and take care not to push Miquela and her friends too far into the human realm. As Tracy Chou said, “Technology products and services are built by humans who build their biases and flawed thinking right into those products and services—which in turn shapes human behavior and society, sometimes to a frightening degree.” We can only hope that Brud’s intentions are pure.
Works Cited
Chou, Tracy. “Without the Humanities, Great Tech Cannot Exist. Here's Why.” World Economic Forum, 10 July 2017, Accessed 18 Nov. 2018.
Clark, Andy. “We Are Merging with Robots. That's a Good Thing.” New York Times, 13 Aug. 2018, Accessed 18 Nov. 2018.
Fagan, Kaylee. “A Viral Video That Appeared to Show Obama Calling Trump a 'Dips---' Shows a Disturbing New Trend Called 'Deepfakes'.” Business Insider, 17 Apr. 2018, Accessed 18 Nov. 2018.
Lewis, Paul. “'Our Minds Can Be Hijacked': the Tech Insiders Who Fear a Smartphone Dystopia.” The Guardian, 6 Oct. 2017, Accessed 18 Nov. 2018.
Lomas, Natasha. “Duplex Shows Google Failing at Ethical and Creative AI Design.” Tech Crunch, Feb. 2018, Accessed 18 Nov. 2018.
