by Zain Jaffer
Recently in February 2024, the search engine giant Google encountered an icy cold reception from the public for their Gemini (formerly Bard) Artificial Intelligence (AI) image generation engine. When the chat bot was prompted for images of people like the Founding Fathers, the Pope, Nazi soldiers, the generated images were mostly multicultural people in the appropriate uniforms, but none of them were white. In fact the image engine refused to generate images of white people, and insisted on generating white historical figures as non-white.
As a person of color and an immigrant, I have experienced discrimination in America in various forms, some direct, some indirect. However, I do not agree with changing the images of white historical figures to be shown as non-white or multicultural. In the first place, that does nothing to correct discrimination. Secondly those images are historically inaccurate.
It is actually the opposite of white washing history. It seems that Google wants to colorize what is historically white. Fortunately, Google CEO Sundar Pichai has acknowledged the mistake, calling it “completely unacceptable” and has vowed to correct it [https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-working-fix-gemini-ai-ceo-calls-some-responses-unacceptable-2024-02-28/].
Similarly, their corporate communications group made the same admission [https://twitter.com/Google_Comms/status/1760603321944121506] by saying:
@Google_Comms
We’re already working to address recent issues with Gemini’s image generation feature. While we do this, we’re going to pause the image generation of people and will re-release an improved version soon.
It makes one wonder though, how that error made its way through Google’s various engineering and management reviews prior to release. Most likely it is a corporate culture bias gone haywire.
If the searcher needs historically accurate figures, then the effort to render these images as a means to correct a social injustice not only fails, but also fails to meet the needs of the user.
This attempt to push social agendas using a company’s dominance in a particular sector seems to be happening often these days.
Take for example Bud Light’s disastrous marketing attempt to use trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney as a spokesperson and beer can model to increase the brand’s reach to the LGBT community. Almost overnight, the traditional customer base of Bud Light went up in arms to destroy the brand. Some grocers like Walmart had to basically almost give away the beer at bargain basement prices. The brand has not totally recovered yet, as the misguided marketing attempt violated one of the sacred precepts of marketing – that is, do not offend your loyal customers [https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/bud-light-loses-top-us-beer-spot-after-mulvaney-ad-boycott-2023-06-14/].
America is a free country. Anyone can try anything as long as it is not illegal and immoral. But using business to push social agendas that alienate a traditional customer base just to gain market share with another is probably an ill-conceived notion at the very least.