Netnography

A netnography was conducted for this study, providing a method to analyse the volumes of data available on public ​forums. This analysis subsequently informed two additional methods—scientific illustration and science fiction— ​fostering greater perspective on this study. The broader context attained has provided the foundations for which ​the creative exploration is based.

The platform Reddit was selected for the readily available and easily accessible data. The data is in the form of ​‘comments’ which are Reddit users views, anecdotes and responses to other users and the prompted ​‘R/subreddit’ heading.

This netnography examined four subreddit groups, with two comment pages from R/ArtificalIntelligence, one page ​from R/Artificial and one page from R/MedicalIllustration.

To analyse the comments they were coded through an inductive, thematic framework, which rendered three key ​themes: ‘People and Job Replacement’, ‘Human Value’ and ‘Accuracy’. Despite the difference between selected ​R/subreddit headings, it was apparent that most Art and Artificial Intelligence discussions were based upon these ​themes.

This was discussed across all four R/subreddit’s. Nearly all comments deemed to be argue that algorithmic creativity ​did threaten human art mention the replacement of creatives and jobs by AI as they felt there would be a decrease in ​the need for individuals to perform these tasks. However a multitude of comments argued there will always be a job ​or role for individuals in the art industry and that AI did not threaten this aspect of Human Art.

Data received from R/Artificial stated:

Similarly, comments from R/MedicalIllustration:

and from R/ArtificalIntelligence:

However, this conflicts with comments from R/Artificial:

Additionally, from R/MedicalIllustration:

AI. Reddit Community page - ​examining for key themes ​across posts

Lots of reddit pages opened ​to discuss AI content ​generation

Comments within these pages ​were about art and creativity

More specifically AI Art vs ​Human Art.

Comments from R/ArtificalIntelligence stated:

This analysis of theme 1 suggests a shared concern that algorithmic creativity will replace the role humans in art and ​job roles. However, data highlights views that human creatives will still be required, just algorithmic creativity offers ​an efficiency increase. It is also argued that people are what make art through how they design the work. Therefore, ​algorithmic creativity does not necessarily threaten human art, at least from a people and job replacement ​perspective.

All four R/subreddit’s generated data themed around ‘Human Value’ that gave context on how algorithmic ​creativity would not threaten human art.

User with the subreddit R/Artificial commented:

This suggests that the aspects of human experience and emotion that remain elusive to algorithmic generation of ​art. Similarly, from R/ArtificialIntelligence comments stated:

From the perspective of users on R/MedicalIllustration:

This underscores the irreplaceable role of human understanding, particularly in this instance of art and fields that ​require nuanced art forms such of scientific and medical disciplines.

The overarching theme of 'Human Value' challenges the notion that algorithmic creativity poses a threat to human ​art. The collective sentiment across these subreddit comments is the irreplaceable and intricate nature of human ​input and their understanding in the artistic process. Therefore, from the perspective of 'Human Value,' algorithmic ​creativity may not be perceived as a direct threat to human art.

All 4 subreddits, shed data around the theme of 'Accuracy.’ The data highlights how algorithmic creativity grapples ​with the portrayal of intricate and real-world aspects.

From R/Artificial, a contributor noted:

The sentiment conveyed here emphasises the limitation of algorithmic creativity in capturing the complexity of ​real-life narratives, particularly those laden with moral ambiguity and unintended consequences. However, the ​discussion acknowledged a positive aspect, highlighting that AI can provide valuable assistance to writers in ​planning stories and refining text elements:

In R/ArtificialIntelligence a comment notes:

This highlights generative AI cannot always provide accurate details. R/MedicalIllustration contributors stated, "I ​don't think it is capable of illustrating complex processes which will require 100% efficacy,” and, "One little fault in ​conveying the scientific info in the illustration will make it incorrect,"

This highlights the precision required in accurately representing scientific information that artificial creativity doesn’t have.

The overarching theme of 'Accuracy' underscores the challenges algorithmic creativity faces. While AI may struggle with nuanced narratives and complex detailing, there is recognition of its potential utility in certain creative areas. The comments bring to light the balance between AI's capabilities and the demand for precision in areas where accuracy is paramount.

The netnography has uncovered key themes, grounded in the present context and set the foundations for creative exploration through scientific illustration and science fiction methods...

Word Count: 571