What Hollywood thinks about existential AI warnings | The VergeSkip to main contentThe homepageThe VergeThe Verge logo.The VergeThe Verge logo.TechReviewsScienceEntertainmentAIPolicyNotificationsNotificationsHamburger Navigation ButtonThe homepageThe VergeThe Verge logo.NotificationsNotificationsHamburger Navigation ButtonNavigation DrawerThe VergeThe Verge logo.Login / Sign UpcloseCloseSearchLightSystemDarkTechExpandAmazonAppleFacebookGoogleMicrosoftSamsungBusinessSee all techReviewsExpandSmart Home ReviewsPhone ReviewsTablet ReviewsHeadphone ReviewsSee all reviewsScienceExpandSpaceEnergyEnvironmentHealthSee all scienceEntertainmentExpandTV ShowsMoviesAudioSee all entertainmentAIExpandOpenAIAnthropicSee all AIPolicyExpandAntitrustPoliticsLawSecuritySee all policyGadgetsExpandLaptopsPhonesTVsHeadphonesSpeakersWearablesSee all gadgetsVerge ShoppingExpandBuying GuidesDealsGift GuidesSee all shoppingGamingExpandXboxPlayStationNintendoSee all gamingStreamingExpandDisneyHBONetflixYouTubeCreatorsSee all streamingTransportationExpandElectric CarsAutonomous CarsRide-sharingScootersSee all transportationFeaturesVerge VideoExpandTikTokYouTubeInstagramPodcastsExpandDecoderThe VergecastVersion HistoryNewslettersArchivesStoreVerge Product UpdatesSubscribeFacebookThreadsInstagramYoutubeRSSThe VergeThe Verge logo.What Hollywood thinks about existential AI warningsNotificationsNotificationsComments DrawerNotificationsCommentsLoading commentsGetting the conversation ready...AICloseAIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All AIEntertainmentCloseEntertainmentPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All EntertainmentWhat Hollywood thinks about existential AI warningsThe studios have been silent, but Hollywood’s biggest labor unions aren’t buying the AI apocalypse narrative.by Charles Pulliam-MooreCloseCharles Pulliam-MooreFilm & TV ReporterPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Charles Pulliam-MooreSep 18, 2026, 4:35 PM UTCLinkShareGift Cath Virginia / The Verge, Getty ImagesAICloseAIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All AIEntertainmentCloseEntertainmentPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All EntertainmentWhat Hollywood thinks about existential AI warningsThe studios have been silent, but Hollywood’s biggest labor unions aren’t buying the AI apocalypse narrative.by Charles Pulliam-MooreCloseCharles Pulliam-MooreFilm & TV ReporterPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Charles Pulliam-MooreSep 18, 2026, 4:35 PM UTCLinkShareGiftPart OfThe AI Superintelligence Slowdownsee all updates Charles Pulliam-MooreCloseCharles Pulliam-MoorePosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Charles Pulliam-Moore is a reporter focusing on film, TV, and pop culture. Before The Verge, he wrote about comic books, labor, race, and more at io9 and Gizmodo for almost five years.As the tech sector sounds alarms about AI’s potential to destroy humanity, entertainment labor groups are urging the public to stay focused on what’s already happening. The Verge reached out to Disney, Netflix, Amazon, Lionsgate, and other studios who have started using AI, as well film startups focused on bringing generative AI into the mainstream to ask for their reaction to the recent warnings surrounding the technology. None have responded to our request for comment. The Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) and Writers Guild of America East (WGAE) did, however.The AI tools used in entertainment production differ from the AI systems that have sparked a recent round of whistleblowing and apocalyptic declarations. They do not seem to be as existentially dangerous as the AI systems that drove former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon to quit his job and prompted Anthropic alignment lead Evan Hubinger to insist that the technology could “kill all humans” at some point “within the next decade.”But despite the differences between entertainment-focused AI and the models developed by Anthropic and OpenAI, AI models that generate digital facsimiles of actors and attempt to replicate traditional filmmaking tools pose a threat to some human jobs. Similar to the way that the Hollywood unions advocated for protections and increased oversight around AI’s use during the 2023 strikes, Coxon’s Anthropic exit has inspired a wave of AI researchers to speak out in favor of stronger safety protocols. The heads of major AI companies including Anthropic, OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and X have also called for an industry-wide slowdown on the technology’s development. While president Donald Trump has dismissed these concerns as overreactions, some other US politicians have felt pressured to take legislative action. Hollywood unions’ fight for strict rules around gen AI’s use did not stop the entertainment industry from embracing AI, but they have given Hollywood’s laborers a way to fight back in instances when they feel that AI tools are being used to harm them.RelatedGoogle needs Hollywood more than the studios need AIHollywood is bending the knee to OpenAIHollywood cozied up to AI in 2025 and had nothing good to show for itWhen I recently spoke with the Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists’ (SAG-AFTRA) chief negotiator Duncan Crabtree Ireland, he told me that the union recognized early on how AI could impact its members’ livelihoods. Most people might not have been familiar with the idea of studios completely replacing human actors with digital replicas, but SAG-AFTRA understood that it had an opportunity to shape public opinion about AI in Hollywood by “speaking out about it at the earliest possible point we could.”“We bargained for and achieved enforceable, meaningful guardrails around how this technology can be implemented by the major employers in our industry,” Crabtree-Ireland explained. That doesn’t include companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google directly, but it does encompass all of the companies who have built up businesses around the creation of professional level entertainment content in the United States.”Though Crabtree-Ireland believes we “should be concerned about the broader societal and social implications of AI,” he also thinks that some of the warnings about the technology being an extinction-level threat could potentially be hyperbole and overblown. Doomerism has become one of the more common ways that AI companies generate buzz around their products, but the fact that Coxon left Anthropic to sound the alarm has given Crabtree-Ireland pause. Hearing the message from “the CEOs of these companies or the billionaires who’ve made their billions off of doing the exact thing that they’re now warning us might not be good,” has left him unsure “what to trust or what to believe.” But he acknowledged that Coxon was able to achieve “traction with the public.”“The recklessness of the tech oligarchs pushing AI on our society has been matched only by their rampant dishonesty.”Getting people to believe that SAG-AFTRA’s fears about AI should be taken seriously was one of the union’s major goals when its members voted to strike. The key to doing that, Crabtree-Ireland told me, was leading the strike with a focused message that clearly laid out to the public what was at stake and steps that could be taken to prevent worst case scenarios. If not for that, Crabtree-Ireland thinks that the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) might not have agreed to some of the union’s demands like requiring that studios gain permission and compensate actors for the use of their AI-generated replicas. “If that principle hadn’t been established, I think the economic incentive to use replication and to replace human performances would have been much stronger” and “would have resulted in a much greater and faster adoption of digital replication.” Had the protections not been codified, Crabtree-Ireland is confident that entertainment workers would be in a much more dire position now.Writers Guild of America East (WGAE) executive director Sam Wheeler was much more pointed in his condemnation of the “tech oligarchs pushing AI on our society” whose recklessness “has been matched only by their rampant dishonesty.” But while Wheeler finds it hard to take AI companies’ warnings at face value, he noted that the WGAE “has long warned that unregulated artificial intelligence poses an existential threat to workers, to our democracy, and to the world.”“Guild members have bargained meaningful AI protections into their contracts; in 2023 WGA members spent 148 days on strike before the film and television studios agreed to real safeguards for film and television writers,” Wheeler said. “But collective bargaining is not a replacement for government regulation, and we are grateful to states like New York that continue to enact meaningful regulations in the absence of federal action.”Wheeler listed the disempowerment of workers, the degradation of the internet, the spread of disinformation, and increasing energy costs as some of the tangible societal harms AI has exacerbated. He urged policymakers not to be distracted by AI companies’ claims of ushering in an apocalypse because the real issue at hand is people behaving irresponsibly.“These harms are the result of decisions made by human beings,” Wheeler insisted. “The WGAE believes that addressing those concrete harms and holding AI companies and their executives liable for the destruction their products cause is the surest way to safeguard against any worst-case scenarios.”Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.Charles Pulliam-MooreCloseCharles Pulliam-MooreFilm & TV ReporterPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Charles Pulliam-MooreAICloseAIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All AIEntertainmentCloseEntertainmentPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All EntertainmentMore in: The AI Superintelligence SlowdownAnthropic proposes three rules for measuring AI progress.Jay PetersSep 17King Charles says AI needs “sufficient means of control before it is all too late.”Stevie BonifieldSep 17Microsoft AI CEO says AI threats are real, and Anthropic is making it worseNilay PatelSep 17Most PopularMost PopularThe Apple Watch Series 12 is the start of a new wearable eraThe 2.5-hour AI-generated Odyssey movie is 2.5 hours too longThe iPhone 18 Pro’s big camera update is all about the small gainsVideoInside the suddenly explosive world of AI safetyYour robotaxi might be a narcThe Verge DailyA free daily digest of the news that matters most.Email (required)Sign UpBy submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.Advertiser Content FromThis is the title for the native adMore in AIFlash floods can strike without warning — this new technology could change thatThe AI Superintelligence SlowdownClaude Code relaunches Projects to manage multiple AI agents in the cloudAI is feared globally as the destroyer of jobsPlayMicrosoft AI CEO says AI threats are real, and Anthropic is making it worseInside the suddenly explosive world of AI safetyFlash floods can strike without warning — this new technology could change thatMegan Wollerton11:00 AM UTCThe AI Superintelligence SlowdownSean Hollister32 minutes agoClaude Code relaunches Projects to manage multiple AI agents in the cloudStevie BonifieldSep 17AI is feared globally as the destroyer of jobsThomas RickerSep 17PlayMicrosoft AI CEO says AI threats are real, and Anthropic is making it worseNilay PatelSep 17Inside the suddenly explosive world of AI safetyHayden FieldSep 17Advertiser Content FromThis is the title for the native adTop Stories11:00 AM UTCFlash floods can strike without warning — this new technology could change thatSep 17Inside the suddenly explosive world of AI safetySep 17Your robotaxi might be a narcSep 16The iPhone 18 Pro: an ambitious new camera on the marginsVideoSep 17The Apple Watch Series 12 is the start of a new wearable eraThe VergeThe Verge logo.FacebookThreadsInstagramYoutubeRSSContactTip UsCommunity GuidelinesArchivesAboutEthics StatementHow We Rate and Review ProductsCookie SettingsTerms of UsePrivacy PolicyYour California Privacy RightsYour Privacy ChoicesCookie NoticeAdChoicesLicensing FAQAccessibilityPlatform StatusPenske Media CorporationThe Verge is a part of PMX Global, LLC, a subsidiary of Penske Media Corporation.© 2026 VM Publishing, LLC. All rights reserved.Our SitesThe American PavilionARTnewsArt in AmericaArtforumArt Week NYCBeauty IncBillboardDeadlineDick Clark ProductionsThe DodoEaterFlow SpaceFNGold DerbyGolden GlobesThe Hollywood ReporterIndieWireLife is BeautifulPopsugarPunchSJ DenimRobb ReportRolling StoneSB NationSHE MediaShe KnowsSourcing JournalSoapsSporticoStyleCasterSXSWThrillistVarietyThe VergeVibeWWDNotifications DrawerThe VergeThe Verge logo.Sign in to see your notifications or create an account to join the conversation.Sign in

The major labor unions within Hollywood, specifically the Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) and the Writers Guild of America East (WGAE), are largely resistant to the apocalyptic narratives surrounding existential risks posed by artificial intelligence, despite the alarms raised by the technology's development. While the broader technology sector and some AI researchers have suggested that certain AI systems pose an extinction-level threat, such as the warnings from former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon, the specific AI tools currently employed in entertainment production appear less existentially dangerous. The concerns raised by the unions focus more directly on tangible threats to the livelihoods and standing of their members, prompted by the potential for AI to generate digital facsimiles of actors and replicate traditional filmmaking tools.

The efforts by the unions have centered on establishing enforceable guardrails regarding the implementation of generative AI. For instance, the SAG-AFTRA chief negotiator, Duncan Crabtree Ireland, emphasized that the union recognized early on the impact of AI on members' livelihoods and successfully negotiated for guidelines concerning how this technology could be deployed by major industry employers. This negotiation was a key strategy to shape public opinion, ensuring that the concerns directed at the industry had concrete steps for mitigation. Ireland acknowledged the broader societal implications of AI but suggested that some discussions regarding extinction-level threats might be hyperbole. He noted that the pursuit of digital replication would have accelerated had protections not been established, and he expressed uncertainty about which warnings to trust, acknowledging the "rampant dishonesty" exhibited by the technology oligarchs.

The Writers Guild of America East executive director, Sam Wheeler, provided a more forceful condemnation of the industry's recklessness and dishonesty, emphasizing that while collective bargaining provided safeguards, it is not a substitute for governmental regulation. Wheeler argued that the tangible societal harms exacerbated by AI—such as worker disempowerment, disinformation, and increased energy costs—are the immediate concerns that policymakers should address, rather than focusing solely on AI company claims of imminent collapse. He maintained that these harms stem from human decisions, and he insisted that holding AI companies and their executives liable for the destructive outcomes of their products is the most effective method for safeguarding against worst-case scenarios. Therefore, the focus for the entertainment labor groups has been on securing concrete protections and accountability within the industry structure, rather than solely accepting existential warnings from the technology community.