Why did Katseye spark outrage with excessive use of AI - 'Where's creativity'

Dubai: Global girl group Katseye, one of the most prominent acts currently dominating international charts, is facing renewed backlash online following the release of the visualizer for their track “internet girl.”

The controversy centres on the group’s apparent use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the project’s visuals, reigniting debates around ethics, environmental impact, and creative labour in the music industry.

 Katseye, a six-member group with a rapidly growing global fanbase, has built a reputation for sleek visuals and high-concept storytelling. However, this is not the first time the group’s visual direction has come under scrutiny. Previously, fans and netizens accused the group’s label of using AI-generated elements in the music video and cover art for their hit single “Gnarly.”

At the time, speculation intensified after viewers noticed that the “Gnarly” music video description credited CGI artists, some of whom listed their role as “AI prompter” in professional profiles. Despite this, there was no explicit mention of AI usage in the official credits, leading to divided opinions among fans. Supporters argued that CGI does not automatically equate to AI-generated content, while critics pointed to visual inconsistencies as evidence of AI involvement.

 One user on X commented, “People keep saying ‘but they credited CGI artists,’ yet the same artist worked on XG’s AI MVs and literally calls themselves an AI prompter.”

 The discussion has resurfaced more forcefully with “internet girl,” as the video description explicitly credits “351 Studio”, a production company known as a leading AI-focused creative studio. This clearer association has prompted stronger reactions across platforms.

A TikTok user wrote, “So tired of the AI in the Katseye MVs,” while others emphasised that responsibility lies with production teams rather than the members themselves, who continue to bear the brunt of online criticism as the public face of the group.

Beyond aesthetics, the backlash reflects broader concerns surrounding AI’s environmental impact. As awareness grows around the energy-intensive nature of AI systems, particularly data centres that consume vast amounts of electricity and water many fans are aligning with a wider anti-AI movement that highlights its increasing carbon footprint.

Critics also warn of the long-term consequences for the creative community.

In an industry where major record labels have the resources to employ human artists, the reliance on AI is seen by some as unnecessary and damaging.

Advocates argue that prioritising human-led artistry not only sustains creative jobs but also offers a more ethical and environmentally conscious  alternative in an era increasingly shaped by automation.

Saarangi Aji contributed to this article