Abstract
The rapid integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) into the screen industries is challenging long-held notions of creativity, authorship, and artistic ownership. This paper explores how GenAI tools—ranging from script-writing assistants to visual generators and voice synthesis technologies—are reshaping creative workflows in cinema, television, and digital content production. Drawing on interdisciplinary frameworks from media studies, authorship theory, and AI ethics, this study critically examines the evolving role of the human creator in an age where machines can mimic and co-create narrative structures, visual aesthetics, and character arcs. Through interviews with industry professionals, content creators, and AI developers, as well as textual analysis of AI-generated screen content, the research reveals a growing trend toward hybrid authorship models, where human intention and algorithmic suggestion coalesce.
The results highlight key transformations: (1) GenAI is reducing production costs and timelines but raising questions about originality and creative control; (2) traditional screenwriters and directors are negotiating new roles as curators and collaborators of machine-generated content; and (3) industry policies and copyright frameworks are lagging behind, leading to legal ambiguities surrounding intellectual property rights. While GenAI democratizes access to content creation, it also risks homogenizing narrative structures due to data-trained biases. Ultimately, this paper argues for a redefinition of authorship in the screen industries—one that recognizes the collaborative entanglement of human vision and machine logic. As screen culture moves deeper into the algorithmic age, understanding this transformation is vital for ethical innovation and equitable recognition of creative labor.
Views & downloads
- Article views
- Full-text downloads
References
15 references- 1. Benaich, I., & Hogarth, N. (2023). State of AI Report 2023. https://www.stateof.ai
- 2. Bucher, T. (2021). New algorithmic culture: The politics of algorithms in cultural production. Palgrave Macmillan.
- 3. Elkins, J. (2023). What Do Artists Know About AI? Leonardo, 56(1), 4–8. https://doi.org/10.1162/leon_a_02228
- 4. Floridi, L., & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds and Machines, 30(4), 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1
- 5. Gunkel, D. J. (2022). Of Remixology: Ethics and Aesthetics after Remix. MIT Press.
- 6. Hutson, M. (2021). Robo-writers: The rise and risks of language-generating AI. Nature, 591(7848), 22–25. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00530-0
- 7. McCormack, J., Gifford, T., & Hutchings, P. (2019). Autonomy, Authenticity, Authorship and Intention in Computer Generated Art. In Proceedings of ICCC 2019 – The 10th International Conference on Computational Creativity.
- 8. McStay, A. (2023). Emotional AI, regulation and the screen industries: Implications for storytelling and audience analytics. Media, Culture & Society, 45(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221115686
- 9. Manovich, L. (2020). AI Aesthetics. Strelka Press.
- 10. Raji, I. D., & Buolamwini, J. (2019). Actionable auditing: Investigating the impact of publicly naming biased performance results of commercial AI products. Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 429–435. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314244
- 11. Ryan, M. L. (2022). Narrative and the Digital: Narrative Form and Digital Media. Routledge.
- 12. Searle, J. R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(3), 417–457. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005756
- 13. Sundararajan, A. (2016). The Sharing Economy: The End of Employment and the Rise of Crowd-Based Capitalism. MIT Press.
- 14. The Writers Guild of America (WGA). (2023). Contract Agreement Summary – 2023 WGA Negotiations. https://www.wgacontract2023.org
- Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs
How to Cite
