Nile Rodgers Defends His Use of AI in New Music Video: “You’re Being Hypocritical”

Nile Rodgers thought he was having some good times using AI in his new music video, but fans are saying he’s le freak for turning to the technology. Now, the Chic bandleader is defending himself against criticism, telling AI detractors they’re “being hypocritical.” It began with Rodgers sharing footage of himself in a photogrammetry rig with the caption, “#working on a #great #art project that’s next #level. This is the start of the process. This AI capture was very thorough and I’m so excited about the finished project.” He added that it was seeing Eagles at the Vegas Sphere that inspired this direction. The backlash was almost immediate, with one commenter saying, “Ai slop is like some kind of magic for old ppl,” with a melting smiley face emoji. Rodgers responded directly, commenting with a bit of input vs output confusion, “Do you have a problem with CGI? I can’t believe you’d go on record without even seeing what I’m doing. Oh well… sending love anyway. Let me know after you see the work if you feel the same way your brain is taking you.” But when the Songwriting and Rock and Roll Hall of Famer shared stills from the video – which is for a new version of “The Christmas Song,” his 2020 charity collaboration with soul singer Rebecca Ferguson – it didn’t seem to change many minds. The images show Rodgers and Ferguson (presumably AI recreated in some way, given the photogrammetry) sharing a stage with a giant fuzzy creature that looks like every other giant fuzzy creature you’ve ever seen. There’s also a crowd of smaller, indistinct fuzzy creatures with the uncanny appearance of being “living” stuffed animals. Then there’s a title card, with all the hallmarks of generative text: inconsistent serifs, illogical 3D depth application, and alternating text sizing for the hell of it. A commenter called out Rodgers for the mismatched principles of using AI for a charitable release, and Rodgers laid out his case: “We created everything. Mood boards, story boards and did it the same way we’d do a film. The AI did what we told it to do and we painstakingly created every second you’ll see on the screen… If this were a traditional film it would’ve cost about $100,000.”Screenshot via Instagram Then he turned to some potentially hard to square whataboutism, a common theme in his defense. “By the way you’re using AI daily. You just hit me on Instagram. You’re being hypocritical,” Rodgers wrote. “It’s ok for you to use AI in your way but you have problem with my way. Do you use Google, or get driving directions? Look at your own daily actions and check how much you use AI.” It’s true that most of us use AI in some way on a daily basis, whether we think of it that way or not. I even used Photoshop’s generative Firefly AI to remove the carousel arrows from the screenshot in this article’s featured image. But there’s a reason making the video with traditional methods would have cost $100K – and that human reason is why you wouldn’t end up with hollow feeling creatures and confounding graphic choices. And even if they’re built on similar models, the difference between utility machine learning like social media algorithms or GPS directions and generative design work is the difference between organizing data and painting a picture. This isn’t the first time Rodgers has voiced his support of AI. In 2023, he called talk of generative AI being “fake… sounds like noise to me,” adding, “The drum machine and sequencer have been wonderful tools. There are bands that could never have had a record if it wasn’t for a sequencer.” Again, output vs input. Take a look at Rodgers’ posts and screenshots of his various comments below. According to one of the posts, we can expect to see the final video on November 20th. Screenshot via Instagram Screenshot via Instagram Screenshot via Instagram Screenshot via Instagram