Why I'm trying not to use the term 'AI' any more
I’ve been thinking a lot about how we talk about new technology in the creative and cultural sectors. Increasingly, I’m limiting my use of the term AI when discussing the possibilities. Here’s my thinking.
It’s not because I don’t think the technologies generally described as AI are important or topical. I’m as fascinated by them as I am with any technologies that make new things possible. It’s because the term itself is becoming a barrier to having useful conversations about them.
“AI” has become a limiting shorthand
AI is often used as a catch-all explanation for a huge range of technologies, tools and processes. It can become a way of hand-waving over the difficult bits: Who is this for? How does this actually work? What does it take to make it work well?
You may have heard the phrase “…and AI will do the rest”. It’s the equivalent of saying “we’ll just fix it in post” and pushing the problem down the track.
For anyone actually trying to build something or integrate these technologies into their creative practice the interesting questions aren’t whether it’s “AI-powered”, it’s what the technology enables.
Calling all of that “AI” can obscure rather than illuminate it.
This is compounded by the fact we don’t all mean the same thing by AI. Multiple people can use the phrase AI while having radically different understandings of what they’re talking about. It's a surprisingly poor shared language for a conversation about what we actually want technology to do.
It makes AI sound like the destination
There’s another reason I want to be careful with the term. Calling this moment the AI revolution subtly suggests AI is not just the next thing but the only thing. Technology doesn’t really work like that.
Today’s technologies emerge from decades of developments and whatever comes after today’s systems will emerge from what we’re building now.
I don’t think we should narrow our imaginations by assuming that the only future of technology, creativity, and culture is synonymous with the current landscape of AI, especially as funding drives businesses in that direction.
And then there’s the word “intelligence”
The language of intelligence gives these systems a degree of agency that they don’t necessarily deserve. It can encourage us to talk about what the AI wants, what the AI thinks, or what the AI decided.
This shifts responsibility away from us as people. Technology doesn’t need to be framed as an autonomous intelligence for it to be extraordinarily powerful.
In fact, I think the opposite framing is more useful: What are humans choosing to do with increasingly powerful technologies and what are the effects on how people work within creativity and cultural settings?
So what do I mean instead?
I’d rather simply talk about technology.
It doesn't narrow the scope too early, it doesn't hand-wave the how, it is a broader church with more possibilities.
Of course, AI is a part of it. But technology is the bigger, more enduring story and it keeps the focus where I think it belongs: the possibilities we create when humans use technology together.
Our language, our imagination and our ability to collaborate need to advance alongside the technologies.
In terms of personal preference, I’m less interested in whether technology can make one person capable of doing the work of ten people. I’m interested in whether it can help ten people create something that none of them could have made alone.
I’m interested in whether technology can help us connect people who wouldn’t otherwise meet, translate between different kinds of expertise, overcome language and accessibility barriers, and create entirely new forms of collaboration.
So what am I going to do about it?
I'm going to continue to advise people, make connections, creste concepts, explore possibilities, find strategies, and develop ideas using the full spectrum of options available weighed against what organisations, audiences, and individuals need.
And that’s why, for now, I’m choosing to talk less about AI and much more about technology, people, and what we choose to create together.
Ian Ravenscroft is a consultant, advisor, strategy lead in the creative and cultural industries. He is founder of Green Raven where he helps creative studios, businesses, cultural organisations, and funding bodies turn technology, ideas, and audience insights into impact.
Want me to deliver this as a talk or workshop for you? Got a project or programme you need support on? Get in touch! Contact: ian@greenraven.co.uk
