Would You Believe No One Wanted Fragrance Advice From An AI 'Influencer' Robot?
It's a tough gig for a gal with no nose.
For the last few months, America’s techiest tech guys have repeatedly told us that pretty soon all of the creative and white collar jobs will be done by AI bots, while we toil away doing manual labor in the fields and factories — and that if we don’t get with the program and start to embrace (and possibly date?) AI, then we’re all going to feel really left out of everything.
That’s the main pitch right now. It’s not “Oh boy, everyone’s just really going to love this! It’s going to be a great time!” It’s “You will have FOMO. You’re going to feel left out and uncool! Like people in the 1800s who were all ‘No electricity for me, thank you very much!’”
One of the things these folks have been most excited about is for AI to take the place of human creativity — so that with just the push of a button, people can feel like they’re just as talented and special as people who have worked for years on their skills, and so that businesses can generate creative output without having to suffer the grotesque indignity of paying someone for it.
Perhaps that is why, just recently, the world saw the debut of Iris Lane, AI fragrance influencer. Alas, the world was not ready, and also largely confused about why they should care what a bot without a nose has to say about perfume.
Iris burst on the scene in June with an Instagram announcing “her” as the “first AI fragrance influencer,” and not too long after, the perfume community on Instagram and PerfumeTok creators straight up revolted in opposition to the idea this somewhat lifelike looking cartoon could replace them when she, as mentioned, does not have a nose and cannot smell.
Iris was the creation of Slate Brands, an online beauty incubator that — surprise! — is involved in the development of influencer-branded fragrances.
Tiktok failed to load.Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser
In response to the backlash, Slate Brands took down all the videos, changed her bio from “1st AI perfume influencer” to “AI fragrance storyteller” and left a ridiculous non-apology … before deleting the page entirely.
“Since yesterday, we've received questions and concerns about Iris, our AI powered fragrance storyteller. We hear you. We understand that new ideas can cause discomfort.”
I don’t know that this is an issue with people just not being ready for how fabulously innovative this idea is so much as the idea of a “fragrance influencer” who can’t smell and does not exist is patently ridiculous.
“Iris isn't an influencer, and isn't here to replace anyone. She was created as a creative experiment. She was designed to explore new forms of technology and storytelling, not to take away from human creativity or authenticity. Really, our hope is that Iris and the innovations AI can provide add a new layer to how we experience scent without replacing the voices that already exist in the space.”
How? Really! How and why?
I realize that people have their issues with the idea of “influencers” to begin with, but I don’t see it as entirely different from when people used to read women’s magazines for beauty recommendations and tips (as long as people are being ethical about it). As a fragrance enjoyer, I can totally see the point of real people who know what they’re talking about sharing their thoughts on perfumes and whatnot, especially given that there are lots of cool indie scents on the market that aren’t necessarily at Sephora. What I do not understand is what I could possibly get out of a bot telling me about it. It’s the equivalent of wanting to try Trix because “I don’t know, that rabbit seems like he’s really into it. Probably worth checking out!”
“We believe this kind of experimentation can expand the fragrance world and offer new creative possibilities, not compete with the people already shaping it. We believe there's room for more forms of expression. If you have questions, we're always here to talk and committed to staying honest as we continue exploring what's next.”
I guess they decided they were tired of trying to get influencers to pay attention to them and work with them, so they figured “Why not get a fake but somewhat realistic-looking woman to just say everything we want her to say?” and pretend that it’s not the exact same thing as a cartoon mascot endorsing cereal!
Indeed, What’s Up In Makeup? host Jen Luv (highly recommend, by the way!) realized when researching the story that she had actually been approached by Slate Brands to check out a perfume from one of their brands and review it “if [she] loved it,” which she was fine with until they told her they expected a 2-3 minute positive review in exchange for the product alone … which is not how people with any integrity do things.
This actually comes on the heels of a truly bizarre and unbelievably fake-looking AI generation of Huda Mustafa of “Love Island” recommending a perfume that has been heavily advertised on TikTok, complete with a weird AI generated “scene” from the show in which Jeremiah, aka “Shemar Less,” compliments her on how good she smells.
It’s truly bizarre.
Tiktok failed to load.Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser
While I don’t think anyone needs a fake Huda’s hot take on a perfume any more than they need the real Huda’s tips on emotional regulation and fake eyelash application, it’s still a pretty insidious thing to do.
It’s not hard to see the appeal of “beauty influencers” who will always generate positive reviews for those who enlist them, or why some companies would prefer that to real human beings. Laugh all you want, but people in that space are some of the most aware consumers on earth and tend to really hold brands accountable for screwing up. But how many brands would love to be able to, for instance, “employ” a fake AI Black person to rally that demographic in their favor without having to worry about being dragged for having a non-inclusive shade range? Probably a lot of them!
There’s something about this whole scandal, as silly as it sounds, that really does give me hope. Between that, this article in the UK tabloid the Daily Star titled “Man spends 24 hours in Metaverse and discovers empty hellscape with screaming McDonald's,” I think it’s possible that these tech bros have vastly overestimated the amount that anyone actually wants any of this. If the primary appeal of AI for those of us not “saving money” by having to pay real people, or make our products good enough that people actually want to give them good reviews, is that we won’t get FOMO … what happens if no one actually wants this the way the tech bros claim?
Like, what if people actually do want to get perfume advice from real people, listen to music created by real people, read articles and stories created by real people? Or even just get information from people with a slightly lower chance of morphing into “Mechahitler” than an AI bot does?
While we were meant to be scared that AI bands like “The Velvet Sundown” will replace human musicians and vocalists … this does not actually sound very good. It sounds fake and unsettling. That’s not a human vibrato.
Frankly, I’d be a lot more impressed by the fact that the “AI band” got a million listens on Spotify if people personally picked every song they heard on Spotify, which they do not. As far as we know, Spotify just served that song up to anyone listening to generic white guy rock.
Now sure, this may sound a little crazy given how strongly we have been assured that everyone is going to be all in on this and anyone who wants to listen to music written and performed by humans is a stupid luddite, but I think that some of that might have been a tad overstated. It reminds me of when I was let go from a site owned by people who were pretty sure they could replace good writing with good SEO and no one would care, and then the site (and entire media conglomerate) imploded about six months later. It reminds me of how many other sites died after firing all nearly all of their writers in order to “pivot-to-video.”
It also reminds me a little about how the “AI features” of products like Alexa aren’t actually that interesting anymore after a few days.
What if people don’t actually want this, and what if the tech bros can’t make us love it if we don’t? I mean, sure, there are already weirdos out there having romantic relationships with AI chatbots, but there have been people having romantic relationships with sex dolls, romancing cars in the tailpipe, and marrying the Eiffel Tower. Hell, there are people out there collecting 45,000 reborn dolls and pretending they are their real life children and making “Get Ready With Me” videos in which they dress them and get them ready for their day as entirely inanimate objects. Those folks have always been around. And those people may very well want to get perfume advice from AI bots with no noses. Luckily, for the rest of us with more developed olfactory senses, they probably won’t leave the house often enough for us to notice.
Frankly, I think this bodes well for our future, for our jobs and for the continued proliferation of human creativity, ingenuity and olfactory sensibilities.
PREVIOUSLY ON WONKETTE!
Since the "my dog has no nose" joke has already been invoked, I will instead refer you to The Bobs' "Vapor Carioca," about a chanteuse with a unique, Le Petomainesque talent, and her search for love.
https://youtu.be/27013XdKfVU
My old boss left to start his own office, but didn't ask me to come along. He figured he no longer needed a lawyer to do his legal documents for him on demand, he could just get ChatGPT to do them for him. "Lawyers are obsolete! He's going to be out of a job! Har har!"
I got an email from him needing me to do work for him, inside of a week. Turns out you still need someone to actually read that AI slop, and it wasn't going to be him.
Of course, my response was "New phone who dis?"