Article contents:
- Introduction: “Deadbots” and their power of persuasion
- The power of persuasion: Exploiting nostalgia and vulnerability
- The next frontier: Commercial exploitation
- Primed for acceptance: How we got here
- Legal and ethical issues: Who is responsible?
- Industry reaction: Between disgust and interest
- Conclusion: A troubling future for digital life after death
Introduction: “Deadbots” and their power of persuasion
AI-powered avatars of deceased individuals—or “deadbots”—are appearing in new and unexpected contexts, including ones where they possess the power of persuasion. We have seen them advocate for stricter gun laws, as in the case of Joaquin Oliver, a victim of the Parkland school shooting. And we have seen them deliver impact statements in courtrooms. But as this technology continues to evolve, researchers warn that the next frontier for its use may be even more concerning: commercial advertising.
The power of persuasion: Exploiting nostalgia and vulnerability
Says Amy Kurzweil, a New Yorker cartoonist who created a text chatbot for her late grandfather: “There’s a powerful rhetoric with a deadbot because it taps into all that emotional longing and vulnerability.” The more immersive these bots become, with voice and video, the greater their power of persuasion. “That can be even more impactful,” Kurzweil says. Imagine the emotional impact of receiving a product recommendation from a deceased loved one.
The next frontier: Commercial exploitation
The digital afterlife industry is projected to quadruple in size to nearly $80 billion over the next decade. This includes the creation of deadbots. Researchers are now warning that commercial use is the next frontier for this technology. James Hutson, an AI researcher at Lindenwood University, says: “Of course it’s going to be monetized.” Recent studies point to the likelihood of companies using deadbots to advertise products to users, raising concerns about exploitation.
Primed for acceptance: How we got here
Hutson says the American public has been primed to accept the possibility of receiving ads through deadbots. “Something that might seem extremely crude and horrifying today won’t seem far-fetched or out of place once it becomes normalized and somewhat common.” He points to two reasons:
- The dead have been promoting products for decades: A digitally manipulated Fred Astaire appeared in vacuum cleaner ads in the 1990s, a decade after the artist’s death.
- Acceptance of ads in paid subscriptions: It didn’t take long for consumers to reluctantly accept ads as part of their paid subscriptions on services like Hulu and Netflix. So why wouldn’t ad-supported deadbots be next?
Legal and ethical issues: Who is responsible?
Before advertising via deadbots takes off, there are legal hurdles to resolve. Jeffrey Rosenthal, an attorney specializing in technology and privacy, says: “In America, we struggle with privacy rights for the living, let alone privacy rights for the dead.” There are no comprehensive federal laws governing the use of AI in the United States. This raises complex questions about liability: If a “deadbot” grandmother promotes a harmful product, who is responsible? The software company? The advertising agency?
Industry reaction: Between disgust and interest
Deadbot makers and digital advertising executives interviewed say they are disgusted by the ethical implications of using deadbots to sell products. However, Alex Quinn, CEO of StoryFile, a deadbot creation company, admits he is “totally intrigued” to see if there are other ways to make deadbots ad-friendly. One scenario could involve inserting interstitial ads into people’s conversations with deadbots, much like traditional commercial breaks. Another scenario could involve the bot gathering information about what users like and dislike, which could be useful to advertisers.
Conclusion: A troubling future for digital life after death
As technology continues to advance, the line between commemoration and exploitation becomes increasingly blurred. The idea of using digital replicas of our loved ones as channels for commercial advertising is highly unsettling, but not as far-fetched as we might think. Industry leaders acknowledge that companies are already testing similar use cases with living celebrities. As the market develops, there will be an urgent need for robust legal and ethical frameworks to protect the dignity of the deceased and prevent the exploitation of the living’s grief.
Frequently asked questions
Q: What are “deadbots”?
A: They are AI-powered avatars created to represent deceased individuals, trained on their data (such as writings or audio recordings) to simulate their personality and communication style.
Q: Is the use of deadbots legal?
A: The legal status is complex and varies by location. Laws exist in some U.S. states protecting the commercial use of a person’s name and likeness after death, but there are no comprehensive federal laws specific to AI or deadbots.
Q: What are the main ethical risks?
A: Main risks include exploiting the grief and emotional vulnerability of the living, violating the dignity of the deceased, and the potential use of these bots to spread misinformation or deceptive advertising.
