2 Sources
[1]
Major YouTube creators are facing backlash for accepting AI money
Over the past few days, a number of prominent filmmaking content creators including Matti Haapoja and Sam "Kold" Kolder have posted videos of themselves demonstrating what's possible with AI platform Higgsfield. The videos highlight Higgsfield's recently added Seedance 2.5 functionality and pitch these technologies as the future of video production. In response to these videos, other creators started sharing what appear to be screenshots of partnership offers they'd received from PR firms working on Higgsfield's behalf. All of this led fans to the conclusion that Higgsfield has been trying to use creators to boost its profile and garner goodwill from the public. Almost immediately, fans began dragging Haapoja and Kolder for seemingly working with Higgsfield. Haapoja's and Kolder's videos are not labeled as ads and neither the creators nor Higgsfield responded to The Verge's questions about whether these were paid partnerships. But in producing and posting videos that feel very much like ads for Higgsfield, both creators left portions of their audiences feeling alienated. Haapoja and Kolder enthusiastically frame Higgsfield and Seedance 2.5 as innovative tools that have the potential to revolutionize the entertainment industry. Haapoja's is kind of like an infomercial where he explains how Cully Hill Boys -- Higgsfield's feature-length film starring AI-generated duplicates of YouTubers Mikyle "N3on" Rafiq and Matt Kiatipis -- was produced with prompts. Haapoja also demonstrates Seedance 2.5's capabilities with AI-manipulated footage of himself placed in different sci-fi settings. Kolder's video -- titled "AI is replacing me" -- tells a story that starts off with an explanation of Kolder's background in video production before it becomes a fictionalized, Chappie-esque narrative in which he explores Mauritania with the help of a robot. Both videos blend footage of real people with distinctly uncanny AI-generated imagery. On Threads, Haapoja's video was met with pushback from fans and other creators who consider him their peer. Marques Brownlee took issue with Haapoja likening generative AI to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II (an iconic DSLR known for making shooting in 1080p full HD more affordable for independent filmmakers). Brownlee also emphasized that unlike the 5D Mark II (a physical tool people still had to learn how to use), gen AI is "trained on real human-made material without any credit." Unlike the overwhelmingly negative feedback to Haapoja's video, Kolder's comments section on YouTube was more of a mixed bag, with many viewers responding positively. But for every few "absolute cinema!" or "amazing transitions!" comments, there are people lamenting that "AI defeated our king" and insisting that "no AI can replace creative artists." The negative reactions to Haapoja's and Kolder's videos have been much louder than most of the responses to some of Higgsfield's other recent creator collaborations. Cully Hill Boys debuted last week without all that much fanfare, which made it seem like viewers might not have had particularly strong feelings either way about it. When you scroll through some of the posts that Cully Hill Boys' cast shared about the film, there's a mix of AI boosters cheering Higgsfield on and people knocking the company for being a slop purveyor. For the most part, those criticisms haven't been aimed at the film's cast -- who gave Higgsfield the right to use their likenesses, but were otherwise not as directly involved in the project's production as traditional actors would be. What's different about Haapoja's and Kolder's posts is how they come across as sponsored advertising intended to ingratiate the creators' audiences with Higgsfield. Even though neither of the creators goes so far as to say "you, too, should absolutely be using these products," that certainly seems to be the underlying message. The caption for Kolder's video appears to contain what looks like an affiliate link, offering a 30 percent discount on an annual Higgsfield subscription. As common as partnerships between brands and creators are today, Haapoja's and Kolder's cases show what can happen when people with large social media followings involve themselves with products and companies that don't align with their audiences' values. This is a potential issue with basically any product, but by endorsing generative AI in particular, creators are opening themselves up to becoming focal points for people's negative feelings about the technology. That's what happened earlier this month when OpenAI invited a gaggle of influencers to a luxury resort in New York for a "Summer Club" retreat. None of those content creators uploaded anything as substantial as lengthy videos showing off OpenAI's tools, but their posts about the trip and receiving OpenAI-branded swag were more than enough to leave their followers turned off. While companies like OpenAI and Higgsfield can afford (to some extent) to rub people the wrong way with their advertisements, creators who agree to partnerships with AI companies are in a much more complicated position. Creators can only secure such deals after building large followings, but those followings often consist of people who see them as trustworthy individuals with beliefs similar to their own. For creators like Haapoja and Kolder, whose appeal as filmmakers lies in their own human creativity, this bargain is especially risky. At a time when many AI services and tools are seen as a threat, endorsing the technology can signal to their followers that they aren't someone to be invested in.
[2]
YouTube creators face backlash over AI partnership with Higgsfield
Prominent YouTube creators, including Matti Haapoja and Sam "Kold" Kolder, are facing backlash for their recent videos promoting the AI platform Higgsfield. The creators showcased Higgsfield's new Seedance 2.5 functionality, suggesting it as a significant advancement in video production technology. Following the release of these promotional videos, other creators began sharing screenshots of partnership offers from public relations firms affiliated with Higgsfield. This development has led fans to suspect that Higgsfield is leveraging these creators to enhance its visibility and credibility within the video production community. The controversy highlights a growing concern among fans about the authenticity of creators' endorsements, particularly when it involves emerging technologies like AI. Critics argue that the integration of AI in creative processes should not come at the expense of transparency and genuine content creation.
Share
Copy Link
Prominent filmmaking YouTube creators Matti Haapoja and Sam 'Kold' Kolder sparked intense backlash after posting videos promoting AI platform Higgsfield's Seedance 2.5 technology. Fans and fellow creators questioned the transparency of these partnerships, with critics arguing the unlabeled content undermined creator-audience trust while promoting generative AI tools trained on uncredited human-made content.
Prominent filmmaking YouTube creators including Matti Haapoja and Sam 'Kold' Kolder have ignited significant backlash after posting videos demonstrating AI platform Higgsfield and its recently added Seedance 2.5 functionality. The videos, which pitch these technologies as the future of video production, were not labeled as ads despite appearing as sponsored content. Neither the YouTube creators nor Higgsfield responded to questions about whether these represented paid AI partnerships
1
.The controversy intensified when other creators began sharing screenshots of partnership offers they had received from PR firms working on Higgsfield's behalf. This led fans to conclude that Higgsfield was strategically leveraging creators to boost its profile and garner goodwill from the public. The situation highlights growing concerns about creator accountability and transparency in influencer marketing, particularly when promoting emerging technologies like AI-powered video production tools
2
.Matti Haapoja's video functioned like an infomercial, explaining how Cully Hill Boys—Higgsfield's feature-length film starring AI-generated duplicates of YouTubers Mikyle 'N3on' Rafiq and Matt Kiatipis—was produced with prompts. He demonstrated Seedance 2.5's capabilities using AI-manipulated footage of himself placed in different sci-fi settings. Sam 'Kold' Kolder's video, titled "AI is replacing me," presented a fictionalized narrative blending real footage with distinctly uncanny AI-generated imagery. Both videos enthusiastically framed Higgsfield and generative AI tools as innovative technologies with potential to revolutionize the entertainment industry
1
.
Source: The Verge
The caption for Sam 'Kold' Kolder's video appeared to contain an affiliate link offering a 30 percent discount on an annual Higgsfield subscription, further suggesting a commercial relationship. This lack of transparency in creator-brand partnerships left portions of their audiences feeling alienated, particularly given the ethical implications of AI in creative production
1
.On Threads, Matti Haapoja's video met with substantial pushback from fans and fellow creators. Marques Brownlee took particular issue with Haapoja likening generative AI to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, an iconic DSLR known for making shooting in 1080p full HD more affordable for independent filmmakers. Marques Brownlee emphasized a critical distinction: unlike the 5D Mark II, which was a physical tool people still had to learn how to use, generative AI is "trained on real human-made material without any credit." This criticism underscores broader concerns about uncredited human-made content being used to train AI systems
1
.Sam 'Kold' Kolder's YouTube comments section showed a more mixed response, with many viewers responding positively with comments like "absolute cinema!" and "amazing transitions!" However, for every few positive reactions, critics lamented that "AI defeated our king" and insisted that "no AI can replace creative artists." This divide reflects the broader tension around AI adoption in creative industries
1
.Related Stories
The backlash against Matti Haapoja and Sam 'Kold' Kolder represents part of a larger pattern where AI companies attempt to build credibility through creator partnerships. Cully Hill Boys, which debuted last week, received relatively muted responses compared to the promotional videos. When scrolling through posts that the film's cast shared, there was a mix of AI boosters cheering Higgsfield on and critics knocking the company for being a "slop purveyor." Notably, those criticisms were not primarily aimed at the film's cast, who gave Higgsfield rights to use their likenesses but were not as directly involved in production as traditional actors would be
1
.This situation mirrors what happened earlier this month when OpenAI invited influencers to a luxury "Summer Club" retreat in New York. Though those content creators did not upload substantial videos showing off OpenAI's tools, their posts about the trip and receiving OpenAI-branded swag were sufficient to turn off their followers. The pattern suggests that audiences are increasingly sensitive to perceived endorsements of generative AI, particularly when transparency is lacking
1
.What distinguishes the Matti Haapoja and Sam 'Kold' Kolder situations is how their posts came across as sponsored advertising intended to ingratiate their audiences with Higgsfield. Even though neither creator explicitly stated "you, too, should absolutely be using these products," that message seemed implicit. This represents a critical moment for creator accountability, as audiences increasingly expect transparency about commercial relationships, particularly involving controversial technologies
2
.The controversy demonstrates what can happen when people with large social media followings involve themselves with products and companies that do not align with their audiences' values. By endorsing generative AI in particular, YouTube creators open themselves to becoming focal points for negative feelings about the technology. While companies like OpenAI and Higgsfield can afford to rub people the wrong way to some extent, individual creators risk damaging the creator-audience trust that forms the foundation of their influence and livelihood. Watch for how other prominent creators navigate AI partnerships moving forward, as this incident may establish new expectations for disclosure and alignment with audience values in the AI-powered video production space
1
.Summarized by
Navi
1
Technology

2
Technology

3
Technology
