Award-winning actress and author Jamie Lee Curtis has taken to social media to assertively call out Mark Zuckerberg and Meta for their neglect in addressing her requests to remove an AI-generated deepfake video that misappropriates her likeness. The video, which has gained traction on both Facebook and Instagram, distorts her previous statements about the Los Angeles wildfires, presenting them in a context that falsely promotes a brand contrary to Curtis’s values.

In her plea, Curtis shared her frustration on Instagram, detailing her attempts to contact Zuckerberg directly for action against the dissemination of the deepfake content. She noted that due to not being followed by Zuckerberg on the platform, she was unable to send him a direct message. Consequently, she opted for a public call-out in hopes that it would prompt the company to address the issue.

This incident underscores a troubling trend in the entertainment industry, where celebrities are increasingly becoming victims of deepfake technology. The advancements in generative AI have made these forgeries more convincing, presenting a serious threat to personal reputations and the integrity of information online. Other high-profile figures, including Taylor Swift, who has faced explicit deepfake imagery, and Scarlett Johansson, a longstanding target of such technology, have similarly voiced their concerns. Curtis’s call to arms reflects a broader frustration among artists who find their identities co-opted in ways that not only misrepresent their beliefs but also serve to promote harmful narratives.

Meta’s track record on handling such deepfake incidents has come under scrutiny. While the company has previously removed dozens of fraudulent sexualised images targeting female celebrities—prompted partly by investigations revealing widespread AI-manipulated content—the effectiveness of its policies has been challenged. The Oversight Board has deemed the existing regulations inadequate, urging for clearer guidelines and more stringent enforcement to safeguard individuals from these abuses.

In response to pressures regarding deepfakes, Meta has stated its commitment to remove content that misleadingly presents individuals as having said things they did not actually say. However, it notably classifies certain manipulations, particularly those perceived as parody or satire, as permissible. This nuance raises questions about the implementation of their policies and the challenges of consistently enforcing them.

Curtis’s timing is particularly poignant against the backdrop of her recent public commentary on the demands placed on women in Hollywood to conform to unrealistic beauty standards through cosmetic procedures and AI-altered imaging. Emphasising the importance of authenticity, she has advocated for a collective celebration of natural beauty, resonating with many who are weary of the artificial enhancements increasingly normalised in the industry.

In light of Curtis’s public stance, the conversation around deepfake technology and its implications is likely to gain momentum, pressing tech companies to grapple with the ethical dimensions of their platforms and the safeguards they can deploy to protect individuals from digital impersonation and manipulation. It remains to be seen whether Curtis’s bold move will compel Meta to enhance its responsiveness to celebrity-led concerns about deepfake abuses, ushering in a stricter regulatory landscape around such content.

Reference Map

  1. Paragraph 1: [1]
  2. Paragraph 2: [1]
  3. Paragraph 3: [2], [4]
  4. Paragraph 4: [2], [4], [6]
  5. Paragraph 5: [3]
  6. Paragraph 6: [1], [3]
  7. Paragraph 7: [2], [4]

Source: Noah Wire Services