Arizona Supreme Court Pioneers AI Avatars for Public Communication

Arizona Supreme Court taps AI avatars to make the judicial system more publicly accessible

PHOENIX (AP) -- Arizona's highest court has created a pair of AI-generated avatars to deliver news of every ruling issued by the justices, marking what is believed to be the first example in the U.S. of a state court system tapping artificial intelligence to build more human-like characters to connect with the public. A court in Florida uses an animated chatbot to help visitors navigate its website, but the Arizona Supreme Court is charting new territory with the creation of Victoria and Daniel. Made of pixels, the two avatars have a different job in that they serve as the face of news coming from the court just as a spokesperson made of flesh and blood would do -- but faster. The use of AI has touched nearly every profession and discipline, growing exponentially in recent years and showing infinite potential when it comes to things as simple as internet searches or as complex as brain surgery. For officials with the Arizona Supreme Court, their venture into AI is rooted in a desire to promote trust and confidence in the judicial system. There was a protest outside the state Capitol last April and calls for two justices to be booted after the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a Civil War-era law that banned nearly all abortions, except when a woman's life is in jeopardy, could be enforced. Emotions flared on both sides of the issue. When Chief Justice Ann Timmer took over the court last summer, she made public trust a key pillar of her platform. She had already been thinking about ways to reach out to the public using digital media for a few years, and the abortion ruling, among other rulings, helped her to solidify the idea that the court needs to be part of the narrative as people learn about opinions and what they mean. "We serve the public better by saying, OK, we've issued this decision," she said. "Now, let us help you understand what it is." Timmer told The Associated Press earlier this year that if the court had to do the abortion ruling over again, it would have approached the dissemination of information differently. In a Wednesday interview, she said that a news release and avatar video could have helped the public better understand the legal underpinnings of the lengthy decision -- possibly including what it didn't do, which she said some misunderstood. "We got a lot of backlash for it and probably deservedly so, in terms of how can we complain that people don't understand what we did when we didn't really do enough to give a simplified version," she said in the January interview, explaining that people want to know the basis for the court's decisions and what they can do, such as lobbying state lawmakers for whatever changes in law would support their positions. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a repeal of the ban last May, and in November, Arizona voters approved a constitutional amendment expanding abortion access up to the point of fetal viability. Created with a program called Creatify, Daniel and Victoria in a way bring to life the court's news releases. Videos featuring one or the other are being posted for every ruling by the high court, and may be used for Access to Justice projects, community programs and civics information in the future. The court has been sending out releases since October to summarize and explain rulings. After seeing success with the releases, it began exploring options to convey that information through video. The AI-generated avatars were the most efficient way to produce videos and get the information out, said court spokesperson Alberto Rodriguez. Producing a video usually can take hours, he said, but an AI-generated video is ready in about 30 minutes. The court might introduce more AI-generated reporters in the future, Rodriguez said in a news release. The justice who authors the legal opinion also drafts a news release, the wording of which must be approved by the entire bench. The justice then works with the court's communications team to craft a script for the avatars -- the avatars aren't interpreting original court decisions or opinions, Rodriguez said. Daniel and Victoria's names and physical appearances were designed to represent a wide cross-section of people, Rodriguez said. He said they aren't meant to come off as real people and the court emphasizes their AI origins with disclaimers. The court is exploring different emotional deliveries, cadences and pronunciations as well as Spanish translations for the avatars, Rodriguez said. Mason Kortz, a clinical instructor at the Harvard Law School's Cyberlaw Clinic at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, described the court's new cyber employees as "quite realistic." While their voices might give them away, he said some people could be fooled into thinking that Daniel and Victoria are real reporters if viewers are only reading the subtitles and looking at the characters' movements and facial expressions. Kortz also said it would be better for the language of the disclaimer that is in the videos' text description to be featured more prominently. "You want to make it as hard as possible for someone to advertently or inadvertently remove the disclaimer," he said. Asheley Landrum, associate professor at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University, said the avatars feel robotic. She said a format that mimics real dialogue and storytelling might be more engaging than an AI reading of a news release. "Because it's not just about using AI or even creating videos," she said, "but about doing so in a way that really resonates with audiences." Still, it's fine line. She said engaging characteristics can help to build trust over time but the danger is that content could appear biased.

Arizona's Supreme Court is now using AI-generated reporters. Here's why

What helped solidify the court's need for more public outreach? There was a protest outside the state Capitol last April and calls for two justices to be booted after the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a Civil War-era law that banned nearly all abortions, except when a woman's life is in jeopardy, could be enforced. Emotions flared on both sides of the issue. When Chief Justice Ann Timmer took over the court last summer, she made public trust a key pillar of her platform. She had already been thinking about ways to reach out to the public using digital media for a few years, and the abortion ruling, among other rulings, helped her to solidify the idea that the court needs to be part of the narrative as people learn about opinions and what they mean. "We serve the public better by saying, OK, we've issued this decision," she said. "Now, let us help you understand what it is." Timmer told the Associated Press earlier this year that if the court had to do the abortion ruling over again, it would have approached the dissemination of information differently. In a Wednesday interview, she said that a news release and avatar video could have helped the public better understand the legal underpinnings of the lengthy decision -- possibly including what it didn't do, which she said some misunderstood. "We got a lot of backlash for it and probably deservedly so, in terms of how can we complain that people don't understand what we did when we didn't really do enough to give a simplified version," she said in the January interview, explaining that people want to know the basis for the court's decisions and what they can do, such as lobbying state lawmakers for whatever changes in law would support their positions. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a repeal of the ban last May, and in November, Arizona voters approved a constitutional amendment expanding abortion access up to the point of fetal viability. Who are Daniel and Victoria, and how do they work? Created with a program called Creatify, Daniel and Victoria in a way bring to life the court's news releases. Videos featuring one or the other are being posted for every ruling by the high court, and may be used for Access to Justice projects, community programs and civics information in the future. The court has been sending out releases since October to summarize and explain rulings. After seeing success with the releases, it began exploring options to convey that information through video. The AI-generated avatars were the most efficient way to produce videos and get the information out, said court spokesperson Alberto Rodriguez. Producing a video usually can take hours, he said, but an AI-generated video is ready in about 30 minutes. The court might introduce more AI-generated reporters in the future, Rodriguez said in a news release. The justice who authors the legal opinion also drafts a news release, the wording of which must be approved by the entire bench. The justice then works with the court's communications team to craft a script for the avatars -- the avatars aren't interpreting original court decisions or opinions, Rodriguez said. Daniel and Victoria's names and physical appearances were designed to represent a wide cross-section of people, Rodriguez said. He said they aren't meant to come off as real people and the court emphasizes their AI origins with disclaimers. The court is exploring different emotional deliveries, cadences, and pronunciations as well as Spanish translations for the avatars, Rodriguez said. Will the avatars resonate with their audience? Mason Kortz, a clinical instructor at the Harvard Law School's Cyberlaw Clinic at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, described the court's new cyber employees as "quite realistic." While their voices might give them away, he said some people could be fooled into thinking that Daniel and Victoria are real reporters if viewers are only reading the subtitles and looking at the characters' movements and facial expressions. Kortz also said it would be better for the language of the disclaimer that is in the videos' text description to be featured more prominently. "You want to make it as hard as possible for someone to advertently or inadvertently remove the disclaimer," he said. Asheley Landrum, associate professor at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University, said the avatars feel robotic. She said a format that mimics real dialogue and storytelling might be more engaging than an AI reading of a news release. "Because it's not just about using AI or even creating videos," she said, "but about doing so in a way that really resonates with audiences." Still, it's fine line. She said engaging characteristics can help to build trust over time but the danger is that content could appear biased.

Arizona Supreme Court taps AI avatars to make the judicial system more publicly accessible

PHOENIX -- Arizona's highest court has created a pair of AI-generated avatars to deliver news of every ruling issued by the justices, marking what is believed to be the first example in the U.S. of a state court system tapping artificial intelligence to build more human-like characters to connect with the public. A court in Florida uses an animated chatbot to help visitors navigate its website, but the Arizona Supreme Court is charting new territory with the creation of Victoria and Daniel. Made of pixels, the two avatars have a different job in that they serve as the face of news coming from the court just as a spokesperson made of flesh and blood would do -- but faster. The use of AI has touched nearly every profession and discipline, growing exponentially in recent years and showing infinite potential when it comes to things as simple as internet searches or as complex as brain surgery. For officials with the Arizona Supreme Court, their venture into AI is rooted in a desire to promote trust and confidence in the judicial system. There was a protest outside the state Capitol last April and calls for two justices to be booted after the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a Civil War-era law that banned nearly all abortions, except when a woman's life is in jeopardy, could be enforced. Emotions flared on both sides of the issue. When Chief Justice Ann Timmer took over the court last summer, she made public trust a key pillar of her platform. She had already been thinking about ways to reach out to the public using digital media for a few years, and the abortion ruling, among other rulings, helped her to solidify the idea that the court needs to be part of the narrative as people learn about opinions and what they mean. "We serve the public better by saying, OK, we've issued this decision," she said. "Now, let us help you understand what it is." Timmer told The Associated Press earlier this year that if the court had to do the abortion ruling over again, it would have approached the dissemination of information differently. In a Wednesday interview, she said that a news release and avatar video could have helped the public better understand the legal underpinnings of the lengthy decision -- possibly including what it didn't do, which she said some misunderstood. "We got a lot of backlash for it and probably deservedly so, in terms of how can we complain that people don't understand what we did when we didn't really do enough to give a simplified version," she said in the January interview, explaining that people want to know the basis for the court's decisions and what they can do, such as lobbying state lawmakers for whatever changes in law would support their positions. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a repeal of the ban last May, and in November, Arizona voters approved a constitutional amendment expanding abortion access up to the point of fetal viability. Created with a program called Creatify, Daniel and Victoria in a way bring to life the court's news releases. Videos featuring one or the other are being posted for every ruling by the high court, and may be used for Access to Justice projects, community programs and civics information in the future. The court has been sending out releases since October to summarize and explain rulings. After seeing success with the releases, it began exploring options to convey that information through video. The AI-generated avatars were the most efficient way to produce videos and get the information out, said court spokesperson Alberto Rodriguez. Producing a video usually can take hours, he said, but an AI-generated video is ready in about 30 minutes. The court might introduce more AI-generated reporters in the future, Rodriguez said in a news release. The justice who authors the legal opinion also drafts a news release, the wording of which must be approved by the entire bench. The justice then works with the court's communications team to craft a script for the avatars -- the avatars aren't interpreting original court decisions or opinions, Rodriguez said. Daniel and Victoria's names and physical appearances were designed to represent a wide cross-section of people, Rodriguez said. He said they aren't meant to come off as real people and the court emphasizes their AI origins with disclaimers. The court is exploring different emotional deliveries, cadences and pronunciations as well as Spanish translations for the avatars, Rodriguez said. Mason Kortz, a clinical instructor at the Harvard Law School's Cyberlaw Clinic at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, described the court's new cyber employees as "quite realistic." While their voices might give them away, he said some people could be fooled into thinking that Daniel and Victoria are real reporters if viewers are only reading the subtitles and looking at the characters' movements and facial expressions. Kortz also said it would be better for the language of the disclaimer that is in the videos' text description to be featured more prominently. "You want to make it as hard as possible for someone to advertently or inadvertently remove the disclaimer," he said. Asheley Landrum, associate professor at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University, said the avatars feel robotic. She said a format that mimics real dialogue and storytelling might be more engaging than an AI reading of a news release. "Because it's not just about using AI or even creating videos," she said, "but about doing so in a way that really resonates with audiences." Still, it's fine line. She said engaging characteristics can help to build trust over time but the danger is that content could appear biased.

Arizona Supreme Court taps AI avatars to make the judicial system more publicly accessible

PHOENIX (AP) -- Arizona's highest court has created a pair of AI-generated avatars to deliver news of every ruling issued by the justices, marking what is believed to be the first example in the U.S. of a state court system tapping artificial intelligence to build more human-like characters to connect with the public. A court in Florida uses an animated chatbot to help visitors navigate its website, but the Arizona Supreme Court is charting new territory with the creation of Victoria and Daniel. Made of pixels, the two avatars have a different job in that they serve as the face of news coming from the court just as a spokesperson made of flesh and blood would do -- but faster. The use of AI has touched nearly every profession and discipline, growing exponentially in recent years and showing infinite potential when it comes to things as simple as internet searches or as complex as brain surgery. For officials with the Arizona Supreme Court, their venture into AI is rooted in a desire to promote trust and confidence in the judicial system. What helped solidify the court's need for more public outreach? There was a protest outside the state Capitol last April and calls for two justices to be booted after the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a Civil War-era law that banned nearly all abortions, except when a woman's life is in jeopardy, could be enforced. Emotions flared on both sides of the issue. When Chief Justice Ann Timmer took over the court last summer, she made public trust a key pillar of her platform. She had already been thinking about ways to reach out to the public using digital media for a few years, and the abortion ruling, among other rulings, helped her to solidify the idea that the court needs to be part of the narrative as people learn about opinions and what they mean. "We serve the public better by saying, OK, we've issued this decision," she said. "Now, let us help you understand what it is." Timmer told The Associated Press earlier this year that if the court had to do the abortion ruling over again, it would have approached the dissemination of information differently. In a Wednesday interview, she said that a news release and avatar video could have helped the public better understand the legal underpinnings of the lengthy decision -- possibly including what it didn't do, which she said some misunderstood. "We got a lot of backlash for it and probably deservedly so, in terms of how can we complain that people don't understand what we did when we didn't really do enough to give a simplified version," she said in the January interview, explaining that people want to know the basis for the court's decisions and what they can do, such as lobbying state lawmakers for whatever changes in law would support their positions. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a repeal of the ban last May, and in November, Arizona voters approved a constitutional amendment expanding abortion access up to the point of fetal viability. Who are Daniel and Victoria, and how do they work? Created with a program called Creatify, Daniel and Victoria in a way bring to life the court's news releases. Videos featuring one or the other are being posted for every ruling by the high court, and may be used for Access to Justice projects, community programs and civics information in the future. The court has been sending out releases since October to summarize and explain rulings. After seeing success with the releases, it began exploring options to convey that information through video. The AI-generated avatars were the most efficient way to produce videos and get the information out, said court spokesperson Alberto Rodriguez. Producing a video usually can take hours, he said, but an AI-generated video is ready in about 30 minutes. The court might introduce more AI-generated reporters in the future, Rodriguez said in a news release. The justice who authors the legal opinion also drafts a news release, the wording of which must be approved by the entire bench. The justice then works with the court's communications team to craft a script for the avatars -- the avatars aren't interpreting original court decisions or opinions, Rodriguez said. Daniel and Victoria's names and physical appearances were designed to represent a wide cross-section of people, Rodriguez said. He said they aren't meant to come off as real people and the court emphasizes their AI origins with disclaimers. The court is exploring different emotional deliveries, cadences and pronunciations as well as Spanish translations for the avatars, Rodriguez said. Will the avatars resonate with their audience? Mason Kortz, a clinical instructor at the Harvard Law School's Cyberlaw Clinic at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, described the court's new cyber employees as "quite realistic." While their voices might give them away, he said some people could be fooled into thinking that Daniel and Victoria are real reporters if viewers are only reading the subtitles and looking at the characters' movements and facial expressions. Kortz also said it would be better for the language of the disclaimer that is in the videos' text description to be featured more prominently. "You want to make it as hard as possible for someone to advertently or inadvertently remove the disclaimer," he said. Asheley Landrum, associate professor at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University, said the avatars feel robotic. She said a format that mimics real dialogue and storytelling might be more engaging than an AI reading of a news release. "Because it's not just about using AI or even creating videos," she said, "but about doing so in a way that really resonates with audiences." Still, it's fine line. She said engaging characteristics can help to build trust over time but the danger is that content could appear biased.

Arizona Supreme Court Taps AI Avatars to Deliver Its News

Arizona's highest court has created a pair of AI-generated avatars to deliver news of every ruling issued by the justices, marking what is believed to be the first example in the U.S. of a state court system tapping artificial intelligence to build more human-like characters to connect with the public. A court in Florida uses an animated chatbot to help visitors navigate its website, but the Arizona Supreme Court is charting new territory with the creation of Victoria and Daniel. Made of pixels, the two avatars have a different job in that they serve as the face of news coming from the court just as a spokesperson made of flesh and blood would do -- but faster. The use of AI has touched nearly every profession and discipline, growing exponentially in recent years and showing infinite potential when it comes to things as simple as internet searches or as complex as brain surgery. For officials with the Arizona Supreme Court, their venture into AI is rooted in a desire to promote trust and confidence in the judicial system. What helped solidify the court's need for more public outreach? There was a protest outside the state Capitol last April and calls for two justices to be booted after the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a Civil War-era law that banned nearly all abortions, except when a woman's life is in jeopardy, could be enforced. Emotions flared on both sides of the issue.

Arizona Supreme Court taps AI avatars to make the judicial system more publicly accessible

Arizona's highest court has created a pair of AI-generated avatars to deliver news of every ruling issued by the justices, marking what is believed to be the first example in the U.S. of a state court system tapping artificial intelligence to build more human-like characters to connect with the public. A court in Florida uses an animated chatbot to help visitors navigate its website, but the Arizona Supreme Court is charting new territory with the creation of Victoria and Daniel. Made of pixels, the two avatars have a different job in that they serve as the face of news coming from the court just as a spokesperson made of flesh and blood would do - but faster. The use of AI has touched nearly every profession and discipline, growing exponentially in recent years and showing infinite potential when it comes to things as simple as internet searches or as complex as brain surgery. For officials with the Arizona Supreme Court, their venture into AI is rooted in a desire to promote trust and confidence in the judicial system. What helped solidify the court's need for more public outreach? There was a protest outside the state Capitol last April and calls for two justices to be booted after the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a Civil War-era law that banned nearly all abortions, except when a woman's life is in jeopardy, could be enforced. Emotions flared on both sides of the issue. When Chief Justice Ann Timmer took over the court last summer, she made public trust a key pillar of her platform. She had already been thinking about ways to reach out to the public using digital media for a few years, and the abortion ruling, among other rulings, helped her to solidify the idea that the court needs to be part of the narrative as people learn about opinions and what they mean. "We serve the public better by saying, OK, we've issued this decision," she said. "Now, let us help you understand what it is." Timmer told The Associated Press earlier this year that if the court had to do the abortion ruling over again, it would have approached the dissemination of information differently. In a Wednesday interview, she said that a news release and avatar video could have helped the public better understand the legal underpinnings of the lengthy decision - possibly including what it didn't do, which she said some misunderstood. "We got a lot of backlash for it and probably deservedly so, in terms of how can we complain that people don't understand what we did when we didn't really do enough to give a simplified version," she said in the January interview, explaining that people want to know the basis for the court's decisions and what they can do, such as lobbying state lawmakers for whatever changes in law would support their positions. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a repeal of the ban last May, and in November, Arizona voters approved a constitutional amendment expanding abortion access up to the point of fetal viability. Who are Daniel and Victoria, and how do they work? Created with a program called Creatify, Daniel and Victoria in a way bring to life the court's news releases. Videos featuring one or the other are being posted for every ruling by the high court, and may be used for Access to Justice projects, community programs and civics information in the future. The court has been sending out releases since October to summarize and explain rulings. After seeing success with the releases, it began exploring options to convey that information through video. The AI-generated avatars were the most efficient way to produce videos and get the information out, said court spokesperson Alberto Rodriguez. Producing a video usually can take hours, he said, but an AI-generated video is ready in about 30 minutes. The court might introduce more AI-generated reporters in the future, Rodriguez said in a news release. The justice who authors the legal opinion also drafts a news release, the wording of which must be approved by the entire bench. The justice then works with the court's communications team to craft a script for the avatars - the avatars aren't interpreting original court decisions or opinions, Rodriguez said. Daniel and Victoria's names and physical appearances were designed to represent a wide cross-section of people, Rodriguez said. He said they aren't meant to come off as real people and the court emphasizes their AI origins with disclaimers. The court is exploring different emotional deliveries, cadences and pronunciations as well as Spanish translations for the avatars, Rodriguez said. Will the avatars resonate with their audience? Mason Kortz, a clinical instructor at the Harvard Law School's Cyberlaw Clinic at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, described the court's new cyber employees as "quite realistic." While their voices might give them away, he said some people could be fooled into thinking that Daniel and Victoria are real reporters if viewers are only reading the subtitles and looking at the characters' movements and facial expressions. Kortz also said it would be better for the language of the disclaimer that is in the videos' text description to be featured more prominently. "You want to make it as hard as possible for someone to advertently or inadvertently remove the disclaimer," he said. Asheley Landrum, associate professor at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University, said the avatars feel robotic. She said a format that mimics real dialogue and storytelling might be more engaging than an AI reading of a news release. "Because it's not just about using AI or even creating videos," she said, "but about doing so in a way that really resonates with audiences." Still, it's fine line. She said engaging characteristics can help to build trust over time but the danger is that content could appear biased.

Arizona Supreme Court Introduces AI Avatars to Announce Judicial Rulings

Arizona's Supreme Court is introducing AI avatars to the courthouse. | Credit: Rob Pinney / Stringer/ Getty Images. The Arizona Supreme Court has launched two new AI-generated avatars to deliver news of court rulings, aiming to provide the public with more insight into the process of contentious decisions. This is the first time a U.S. court system has used AI to create public-facing characters. AI Agents To Simplify Information Chief Justice Ann A. Scott Timmer told the Associated Press that if the Arizona Court had AI avatars when it ruled to ban nearly all abortions last year, the public would have a better understanding of what actually happened behind the scenes. "We serve the public better by saying, OK, we've issued this decision," Timmer told AP. "Now, let us help you understand what it is." The ruling against abortions led to several protests outside Capitol Hill, which Timmer said was due to the public not having all the facts. She claimed that if the court had a news release and AI-powered avatar video, the public would be better informed on all of the legal foundations of the decision. "We got a lot of backlash for it and probably deservedly so, in terms of how can we complain that people don't understand what we did when we didn't really do enough to give a simplified version," she said in January. The abortion ban was repealed in May 2024, which was then amended in November to allow an expansion of abortions for the Arizona state. Daniel and Victoria The two new AI avatars, names Daniel and Victoria, have been built to bring a natural life to the court's news and to communicate it quickly and efficiently. The court is using the avatars in videos after every ruling by the high court. Each video takes a maximum of thirty minutes to create, court spokesperson Alberto Rodriguez said, compared to hours for a human-led video. The videos are accompanied by a news release, and the court's bench signs off the script. Rodriguez claims Daniel and Victoria are not meant to come across as real humans, and the court makes it clear they are AI-generated. Rodriguez noted that in the future, the avatars may cover justice rulings, civil cases, and community programs. Rise of AI Avatars AI avatars are increasingly being integrated into various sectors, including retail, healthcare, and technology. In the corporate world, AI avatars are being utilized to aid in employee development. HubSpot's senior program manager, Vrnda Boykin, recently launched a chatbot named Aimy to practice handling challenging workplace conversations. Aimy, developed by CoachHub, was used to simulate interactions with difficult colleagues, providing constructive feedback and helping users manage responses to avoid potential HR disputes. However, criticism is mounting over the ethical implications of an increase in AI avatars across industries. Ashly Burch, a leading gaming voice actor, said she felt "worried about this art form" after a video was released in which her character read lines powered by AI. Burch played Aloy in Sony's Horizon Zero Dawn, one of the decade's biggest games and characters. "I feel worried not because the technology exists. Not even because game companies want to use it. Because of course they do. They always want to use technological advancements," she said in a TikTok video. "I just imagine a video like this coming out that does have someone's performance attached to it," she added. "That does have someone's voice or face or movement. And the possibility that if we lose this fight, that person would have no recourse."

Arizona's Supreme Court Turns to AI-Generated 'Reporters' To Provide Explanations of Its Decisions

The court says the move will make 'justice more accessible than ever.' Arizona's Supreme Court is trying to increase the public's confidence in the judiciary, and to do so, it is turning to the use of AI-generated "news reporters" to share updates about the court's rulings. In a press release about the new feature, Arizona's Supreme Court said it would use two AI-generated avatars named Daniel and Victoria to deliver "clear, accessible explanations of case decisions and opinions. "The Court initially explored producing brief videos to accompany case decisions and news releases, but timeliness became a factor. By implementing AI-generated avatars, the Court achieved similar results in significantly less time," the court said. The court's chief justice, Ann Scott Timmer, said, "In today's fast-paced digital world, people turn to short videos for news and updates. I'm thrilled that our Court is embracing AI technology to meet the public where they are. With AI news reporters, anyone can quickly stay informed on Court decisions, new rules, and regulatory updates -- making justice more accessible than ever." The court posted introductions for Daniel and Victoria on YouTube. "If you're wondering why the court decided to use an AI-generated spokesperson like me to share its news, the answer is simple: by providing timely updates directly from the court, we help ensure you have accurate information about important legal decisions affecting Arizonans," the avatar for Victoria said. The videos depict the avatars standing in front of an AI-generated background with the Arizona flag behind them. A spokesperson for the court, Alberto Rodriguez, told the Associated Press that it can take hours for staff to produce a video, but using AI takes about 30 minutes. The avatars will not be interpreting the court rulings or using generative AI for the words that they speak. Instead, the justices who write the opinions for the court will develop news releases about the decision, and a communications team will then write a script for the avatars to read. Some courts around the country have used AI for other reasons. A court in Florida has an AI chatbot that helps people find information. However, Arizona's AI "reporters" appear to be a first for the court system.