Sixth Form Student Gives Speech at the Houses of Parliament
Two of our Y 12 students recently took part in the Sovereign Minds Spear Oratory Prize for 16–18 year olds. (https://www.sovereignminds.org.uk/spear).
There were 2000 entrants, of which 200 got through to the quarter-finals, 25 to the semi-finals, and 5 to the finals. Jacob and Eva got to the semi-finals.
This is the message we received from the organisers of the event:
Your student’s achievement in reaching this stage is truly exceptional, and you should be immensely proud of them. To stand out at this level reflects not only their confidence and clarity of thought, but also the support and encouragement they receive from their school.
All entrants had to choose one from 10 different subjects to write their speech about, and Jacob chose 'Future of Work', and wrote about the impact of generative AI in the creative industry.
Jacob’s speech: Future of Work – Impact of generative AI on creative professions
Artificial Intelligence is not just another tool. This technology has the power to transform the future of work, and when it comes to jobs in creative industries, for the worse. We’ve all heard about the water AI wastes, the copyright law it violates and how it may ultimately lead to the end of mankind. That’s not what I’m here to talk about. What scares me is the far more real, far more imminent threat generative AI poses to creative jobs.
Some may still claim that these are the problems of tomorrow. This is clearly not the case. Take a look at The Velvet Sundown, an AI-generated band with over 160,000 listeners on Spotify. Their music is trained off the work of millions of non-consenting human artists, left completely uncredited and completely unpaid. Very reasonably, these artists hoped that their record labels would sue the creators of this AI slop. Instead, the labels have partnered with them to create more content. Record labels like Universal have signed deals with AI firms like Udio, granting them permission to train AI models with their library of music. Just take a minute to let that display of utter moral bankruptcy sink in. Imagine someone stealing your car and your insurance company settles with the criminal to let them take your car whenever they want. This is no different. Record labels hold an enormous amount of influence over what music gets pushed and promoted on streaming service algorithms. If unauthorised and unoriginal AI music has major label support, how is any independent, or indeed any new music at all ever supposed to succeed on streaming services flooded with a sea of slop forced down your throat by AI-powered algorithms.
The impact of generative AI is the same across industries. AI ‘actors’, like Tilly Norwood, can significantly cut production costs by stealing the roles of humans. If you were a director for a small theatre company running on a tight budget, and you needed a voiceover for a scene, why would you go through an expensive and time-consuming process to audition and hire a human when you could instantly generate a voiceover with the press of a button? This takes away paid jobs from eager to-work new talent in an already suffering job market. 3 and half million people in the UK are unable to find work. I’m confident that we can all agree the right thing to do is create more jobs, rather than handing them over to soulless and untested technology. Whether you work in a local theatre or a multi-million-dollar film studio, it’s the same. Everyone wants to save time, everyone wants to save money, but when you use AI, you lose out on humanity, and the genuine creativity that comes with it.
So what is genuine human creativity, and why shouldn’t we allow AI to replace it? Isn't this technology just a new medium, just a new way to express and enhance creativity? Put simply, no. Creative art is a communication and response to the state of the world. We lose this essential function of art when we replace human creativity with machine generation for two reasons: One - it ceases to actually be an act of creation. It becomes mere regurgitation of pre-existing ideas and stale content. AI copies and pastes, amalgamates and repeats, but can never create anything new. Creativity is a personal exploration of emotion, not an algorithm or piece of code. Two – Art is a communication of thought, vision and atmosphere that transcends the boundaries of time and location. A creative who was working 100 years ago can still have an impact on you today. In the future, when your great-grandchildren are listening to AI-generated music or watching an AI-generated film, they will not be connecting with the minds and voices of anyone in 2026, or in fact any point in time at all, only an AI simulation of it.
So, what is the way forward? The industry clearly cannot be trusted to act in the best interests of creatives. It’s obvious that governments need to introduce need strict industry regulations to prevent the abuse of AI, but beyond this, we need to provide an incentive not to use AI in the first place. We must boycott companies that use AI to replace the creative work of humans, and we must support independent art. Go to a small venue and take a chance on a band you haven’t heard before, watch a play from an emerging theatre company and just do your research. If the technology is good for one thing, it’s making information readily available, and allowing you as a consumer to make informed and educated choices. If the world truly is a dollar democracy, remember you have a vote.
(Eva’s speech will be printed next week)