What Are the Benefits and Drawbacks of AI? Why Entertainment Is Already Seeing Both Sides

Artificial intelligence can make entertainment easier to discover, reduce some production barriers and open new possibilities for creators. It is also forcing the industry to confront difficult questions about jobs, consent, transparency and whether audiences always know when something they are watching or hearing is artificial.

There is no useful answer that simply labels AI good or bad. The more important questions are how it is being used, who benefits and what protections exist when technology affects someone’s work or identity.

AI can make entertainment easier to discover

YouTube is expanding Ask YouTube, a conversational search feature that allows users to ask questions in ordinary language, receive responses connected to relevant videos and clips and then continue with follow-up questions.

For audiences, tools like this could make unfamiliar subjects easier to explore and help people find content that might be difficult to uncover through traditional keyword searches.

There is a limitation built into that benefit. YouTube itself warns that AI-generated responses can vary in quality and accuracy, so a more convenient search experience should not automatically be treated as an authoritative one.

AI could lower barriers for creators

Producing film, music and online entertainment can require expensive equipment, software and specialist skills. AI-assisted tools can speed up tasks including transcription, editing, visual development, captioning, translation and dubbing.

That could particularly benefit independent creators who do not have the resources of a major studio. Better captioning and language tools could also help entertainment travel further and become accessible to more audiences.

None of this makes creativity automatic. Technology cannot guarantee an original idea, a convincing performance or a story people care about. What it can do is make some parts of creating and distributing that work easier.

Creative jobs make the debate much harder

The cost-saving argument becomes more controversial when the saving involves work previously carried out by a person.

The entertainment industry has already had to negotiate this directly. SAG-AFTRA’s 2025 Interactive Media Agreement, covering video game performers, included consent and disclosure requirements around the use of AI digital replicas.

That agreement does not settle the question for every creative profession, but it demonstrates why performers are seeking contractual protection. AI can affect not only whether somebody is hired for new work, but how performances already recorded can later be reused.

There is also a significant difference between an independent creator using AI because it allows them to make something they could not otherwise afford and a large company using the technology primarily to reduce paid creative labour.

Consent matters when AI can recreate a person

A performer might willingly approve an AI-assisted voice or digital replica for a particular production without agreeing for that version of themselves to be used indefinitely.

Who decides what new dialogue a recreated voice can deliver? Can the replica appear in another production? How long does consent last, and how should the performer be paid?

Technical capability does not provide permission by itself. If AI can reproduce somebody’s face, voice or performance convincingly, the person involved should retain meaningful control over how that recreation is used.

Spotify shows why transparency is becoming necessary

Music is already providing a clear example of how platforms are responding to AI-generated identities.

Spotify has announced that AI Persona badges will begin appearing on some profiles representing photorealistic AI-generated artist identities rather than real people. Artists can disclose that themselves, while Spotify can also review profiles and apply a Likely AI Persona badge.

Spotify says music from those AI Personas will not be included in editorial or algorithmic recommendations unless a listener has shown intentional interest, such as by following the artist.

Crucially, the badge is about the identity of the artist, not simply whether AI was used to make the music. A real musician using an AI production tool is therefore different from a profile presenting an artificial person as the performer.

Spotify is also developing AI Credits to disclose AI-generated contributions such as vocals, lyrics or production. Those credits are currently optional and limited in availability, while the Persona system allows Spotify itself to review certain profiles.

That difference exposes one of the challenges with transparency. Platforms can actively label some artificial identities, but disclosure about how much AI contributed to the work itself can still depend heavily on information supplied by artists and distributors.

AI entertainment does not have to be deceptive

Virtual performers, synthetic characters and AI-generated worlds could all become legitimate forms of entertainment. Audiences already accept fictional and digitally created characters in countless other formats.

The problem is not necessarily that something artificial exists. It is when people are encouraged to believe it is something else.

A photorealistic musician may not represent a real person. A familiar-sounding voice may have been generated. Realistic footage could show events that never happened.

Clear labelling therefore becomes increasingly important as synthetic media becomes harder to identify simply by looking or listening.

Rules are beginning to catch up

Transparency is no longer only a voluntary question for technology and entertainment companies.

The EU AI Act’s Article 50 transparency obligations began applying in August 2026 and address areas including the identification of certain AI-generated material and disclosure around deepfakes and other synthetic content.

That does not mean every question about AI entertainment has suddenly been solved. It does show that the conversation is moving beyond whether AI should be used at all.

The debate is increasingly about what audiences should be told, what creators and performers must consent to and who remains responsible when artificial content is misleading.

AI’s future will depend on how it is used

AI offers genuine possibilities for creators and audiences. It can improve discovery, remove some production barriers and make entertainment easier to translate and access.

Those benefits will be easier to trust if the industry is equally serious about the consequences. Performers need meaningful control over their identities, audiences need transparency about synthetic content and creators need confidence that technological progress does not automatically mean their work loses its value.

The question facing entertainment is no longer simply what AI can do. It is what the industry decides it should do with it.

Explore more from SoaplandTV’s AI & Entertainment series at SoaplandTV.co.uk

Sources: This article draws on official guidance from YouTube on Ask YouTube, Spotify’s information on AI Persona badges and AI Credits, SAG-AFTRA’s 2025 Interactive Media Agreement, and European Commission guidance on AI transparency.