Download pdf
Embrace or Resist: Public Opinion of AI Art in the Age of Sora
- 1 College of Letter and Science, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, USA
- 2 College of Letter and Science, University of California, Los Angeles, USA
- 3 Faculty of Natural, Mathematical & Engineering Sciences, King’s College, London, UK
- 4 Sendelta International School, Shenzhen, China
- 5 Smeal College of Business, The Pennsylvania State University, USA
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative force in the art world, fostering new avenues for creativity and challenging traditional notions of artistic authenticity. In 2024 February, the release of Sora by OpenAI symbolized a major breakthrough in the quality of AI-Generated Content (AIGC), calling for new study of up-to-date technique advancement. The aim of this study is to examine how public perceptions of AI art have evolved in the context of Sora's release and to identify the possible contributing factors, such as the release of Sora and media framing. A mixed-methods approach, using both qualitative tools (MDCOR and SENA) and qualitative analysis (digital ethnography), was employed to draw insights from YouTube comments. Findings indicate that Sora’s release contributes to a broader range of public opinion and a trend of positive sentiment. Topics discussed by the public shift from the use of AI in the artistic creation process to the multidimensional applications of AI art products across diverse industries and their consequent social impacts. The majority of people hold a more positive attitude, particularly in terms of trust, towards AI art, while some artists express fear of job replacement and ethical issues. Media framing of political preference and professional interests also plays an important role in shaping public opinion of AI art. This study carries several implications for policymakers, artists, and technologists, and advocates legislative protection for human creators while fostering innovation.
Keywords
AI Art, Sora, MDCOR, digital ethnography, media framing
[1]. Z. Epstein, S. Levine, D. G. Rand, and I. Rahwan, “Who Gets Credit for AI-Generated Art?,” iScience, vol. 23, no. 9, p. 101515, Sep. 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2020.101515.
[2]. F.-Y. Wang et al., “When Does Sora Show: The Beginning of TAO to Imaginative Intelligence and Scenarios Engineering,” IEEE/CAA journal of automatica sinica, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 809–815, Apr. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/jas.2024.124383.
[3]. Y. Liu et al., “Sora: A Review on Background, Technology, Limitations, and Opportunities of Large Vision Models,” arXiv.org, Feb. 28, 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.17177
[4]. B. Liu, “Arguments for the Rise of Artificial Intelligence Art: Does AI Art Have Creativity, Motivation, Self-awareness and Emotion?,” Arte, Individuo Y Sociedad, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 1–11, Apr. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.5209/aris.83808.
[5]. S. Chiodo, “What AI ‘art’ can teach us about art,” Journal of AESTHETICS & CULTURE, vol. 16, no. 1, Aug. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2024.2395511.
[6]. A.-P. Buraga, “The Emergence of the Type-Generated AI Art Community : A Netnographic and Content Analysis Approach,” DIVA, 2022. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1695233&dswid=-722 (accessed Sep. 29, 2024).
[7]. R. Latikka, J. Bergdahl, N. Savela, and A. Oksanen, “AI as an Artist? A Two-Wave Survey Study on Attitudes Toward Using Artificial Intelligence in Art,” Poetics, vol. 101, no. 101839, pp. 101839–101839, Dec. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2023.101839.
[8]. E. Zhou and D. Lee, “Generative artificial intelligence, human creativity, and art,” PNAS Nexus, vol. 3, no. 3, Mar. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae052.
[9]. J.-W. Hong and N. M. Curran, “Artificial Intelligence, Artists, and Art: Attitudes Toward Artwork Produced by Humans vs. Artificial Intelligence,” ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications, vol. 15, no. 2s, pp. 1–16, Aug. 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3326337.
[10]. E. S. Mikalonytė and M. Kneer, “Can Artificial Intelligence Make Art?,” ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, vol. 11, no. 4, May 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3530875.
[11]. K. Millet, F. Buehler, G. Du, and M. Kokkoris, “Defending humankind: Anthropocentric bias in the appreciation of AI art,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 143, no. 0747-5632, p. 107707, Feb. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107707.
[12]. U. Messer, “Co-creating art with generative artificial intelligence: Implications for artworks and artists,” Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 100056–100056, Feb. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100056.
[13]. L. Bellaiche et al., “Humans versus AI: Whether and why we prefer human-created compared to AI-created artwork,” Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, vol. 8, no. 1, Jul. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00499-6.
[14]. P. R. Brewer, L. Cuddy, W. Dawson, and R. Stise, “Artists or art thieves? media use, media messages, and public opinion about artificial intelligence image generators,” AI & SOCIETY, Jan. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01854-3.
[15]. A. Zaheer, “The Politics Behind AI: How Political Beliefs Drive Opinions on Artificial Intelligence in California,” Escholarship.org, Feb. 06, 2024. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1tn9z87k (accessed Dec. 06, 2024).
[16]. M. R. Frank, “Toward Understanding the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Labor,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116, no. 14, pp. 6531–6539, Mar. 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1900949116.
[17]. Z. Epstein et al., “Art and the Science of Generative AI,” Science, vol. 380, no. 6650, pp. 1110–1111, Jun. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adh4451.
[18]. H. Jiang et al., “AI Art and Its Impact on Artists,” AIES ’23: Proceedings of the 2023 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp. 363–374, Aug. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3600211.3604681.
[19]. Chawinthorn Watiktinnakorn, Jirawat Seesai, and Chutisant Kerdvibulvech, “Blurring the lines: how AI is redefining artistic ownership and copyright,” Discover Artificial Intelligence, vol. 3, no. 1, Nov. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-023-00088-y.
[20]. S. Schindler and A. Haines, "AI art and copyright," Business Law International, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 191–102, 2024.
[21]. R. H. Mogavi et al., “Sora OpenAI’s Prelude: Social Media Perspectives on Sora OpenAI and the Future of AI Video Generation,” arXiv.org, Mar. 01, 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.14665
[22]. V. V. Parikh, “Analysing the Public Discourse around OpenAI’s Text-To-Video Model ‘Sora’ using Topic Modeling,” arXiv.org, 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.13071
[23]. M. S. González Canché, “Machine driven classification of open-ended responses (MDCOR): An analytic framework and no-code, free software application to classify longitudinal and cross-sectional text responses in survey and social media research,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 215, p. 119265, Apr. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.119265.
[24]. “Pro Artist vs A.I. Art 🖌️🤖 (WHO WINS?!) #shorts,” www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/JV6jqrFrjEQ
[25]. “Why AI art is so controversial,” www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/47USKNRqHUQ
[26]. Tech Burner, “7 Majedaar AI Tools you Should Try !,” YouTube, Dec. 04, 2023. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qVRFgRcFkk
[27]. “No, Ai ‘Art’ is not Art.,” www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESZO-XJZr0s
[28]. S. Yang, “Why Artists are Fed Up with AI Art.,” www.youtube.com, Dec. 24, 2022. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Viy3Cu3DLk
[29]. “AI Generated Videos Just Changed Forever,” www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXpdyAWLDas
[30]. “OpenAI unveils text-to-video tool Sora,” www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkCz4LqzNF4
[31]. “Watch: OpenAI Tool Creates Realistic AI Videos | WSJ News,” www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anmuklFtu8U
[32]. I. Onyenwe, S. Nwagbo, N. Mbeledogu, and E. Onyedinma, “The impact of political party/candidate on the election results from a sentiment analysis perspective using #AnambraDecides2017 tweets,” Social Network Analysis and Mining, vol. 10, no. 1, Jul. 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-020-00667-2.
[33]. P. Nandwani and R. Verma, “A review on sentiment analysis and emotion detection from text,” Social Network Analysis and Mining, vol. 11, no. 1, Aug. 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-021-00776-6.
[34]. E. Batbaatar, M. Li, and K. H. Ryu, “Semantic-Emotion Neural Network for Emotion Recognition From Text,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 111866–111878, 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934529.
[35]. F. Ghanbari-Adivi and M. Mosleh, “Text emotion detection in social networks using a novel ensemble classifier based on Parzen Tree Estimator (TPE),” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 31, no. 12, pp. 8971–8983, May 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04230-9.
Cite this article
Wu,M.;Yu,W.;Lu,J.;Cheng,Z.;Xin,J. (2025). Embrace or Resist: Public Opinion of AI Art in the Age of Sora. Applied and Computational Engineering,134,151-170.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Signal Processing and Machine Learning
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).