What do we mean by authenticity? #
In The Substance of Style, Virginia Postrel identifies three main meanings of authenticity (in terms of aesthetics): Purity— “the original form of something…is true and legitimate” (her example is the adaptation of Eero Saarinen’s TWA terminal into a hotel being seen as inauthentic)Tradition— “the way it’s always been done” (her examples are that 1) cultural appropriation — like a white person wearing kente cloth — is inauthentic, and 2) Formica is inauthentic as a building material compared to wood)Aura— demonstrating something’s personal history (her example is perceiving gray hair and wrinkles as authentic and hair dye and face-lifts as inauthentic)
Detecting the inauthentic #
GenAI as inauthentic
Right now, most people hate generative AI in their art. This may or may not remain true — a wider audience may come to tolerate its use over time — but for now, using genAI for creative work you want to sell as art is essentially verboten because audiences regard it as inauthentic,
just like plagiarism, and don’t want to be associated with it. (Other reasons, too, but for now we’ll focus on authenticity.)
Traditional markers of aura are not available online. I’ve written about alternate ways online audiences interpret aura of digital artworks — but I also wonder whether digital arenas, where aura is harder to perceive, might lean into purity and tradition instead. Both the purity and tradition views of authenticity would see anything made with genAI as intrinsically inauthentic. From the perspective of purity, genAI taints a work with the unnatural, the inhuman; through the lens of tradition, genAI represents a change in how artwork is made, producing cultural goods akin to polyester.
Audiences are skeptical of all cultural works now
Aidan Walker observes that viewers’ attitude has flipped towards skepticism, “beginning from a place of believing posts are fake until proven real, rather than the other way around.” Music writer Emma Withers describes “becoming a suspicious listener,” fearing being duped by generated content. I found that suspecting a book of using genAI diminished my reading experience, making it harder to get immersed in the story. In our economic system of precarity, I can understand why desperate people would turn to silver water… but that understandable motivation also makes it easy to assume the worst of unknown creators.
**Online audiences have been trained to read defensively for years **— is what this is saying real? am I being manipulated? We come to doubt our own judgment of what is real. I would argue that we have been policing fiction, too, from an ideological standpoint. *Is this good rep? Is this cultural appropriation? Is the main character a bad person? *Translation: will I be a “bad person” for liking — or even just for reading — this book?
Our expectations for stories have become more stringent with the rise of visible aesthetics, since we are also signaling our identity to ourselves. In a hyper-tribal media environment where we are what we consume, we need ideological purity in our arts; we cannot be comfortable in a story that makes us feel complicit with immoral actions*. (I read a review recently that described a queer mystery novel as
a “preaching book”… a slightly ungenerous reading but I couldn’t un-see it, especially in this context.)
GenerativeAI is an
ideological technology, and our self-defensive posture extends to what we want to exclude from our selves.
Our institutions can’t guarantee us human-made art
Our skepticism is not without cause. Institutional editorial practices used to provide confidence, but given that even WIRED was taken for a ride, not even a well-known masthead can allay our fear of being tricked into reading machinic glossolalia*. Indie presses like Bona Books and Coyote have narrowly escaped the same fate. A massive book deal got pulled from a debut author over accusations of using genAI; as early internet author Hugh Howey put it, either someone’s career was ruined over not having good enough receipts or a genAI book was good enough to spark a massive bidding war between publishers. Either way is alarming for authors, new and established. Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter how good the systems are… even the best editorial system is going to let something slip through eventually.
Audiences want reassurance of authenticity
In an effort to protect themselves from contamination by the machine, some readers are turning to unreliable tech tools to evaluate whether a piece of text was generated. Substack released a built-in AI-detection tool and Anthropic has introduced watermarking. But, ** using tech to police tech is probably not going to work**. (Some people will only be convinced by tech confirmation — our
trust in technologyis strong — but I think most people will be looking at artworks more holistically to make judgements.)
It feels terrible for artists who haven’t used genAI to be accused of it. It also sucks for readers, viewers, and listeners when a creator has used genAI and not disclosed it, which reveals disrespect for their audience.
So, how can digital creators demonstrate that their work is authentic? (Aside from making good art 😉) When I wasn’t sure whether a book I read was AI-generated or not, I noticed that most of the pieces of evidence I looked for were not in the text itself, but in the media records of the artist online… and the lack of those records reinforced the suspicions I’d developed based on patterns in the writing.
Storytelling means that digital aura isn’t made only by the artwork; non-Art and Art-adjacent works (like social media posts) help build the aura of both art and artist. By understanding how their audiences assess their work’s authenticity, artists can provide the type of evidence most likely to reassure them. It’s not enough for an artist to not use genAI — the audience needs to know that the artist didn’t use it: they need the signal of authenticity.
How artists can demonstrate authenticity without tech tools #
Types of trust
My theory of digital aura is that audiences use signifiers of authenticity to evaluate an artist or artwork’s authenticity. Signifiers can demonstrate uniqueness, authority, or belonging. These cues are rooted in a source of Truth:
- the Cult of Personalitylooks tothe artist themselvesorthe artist’s labor— “I trust the creator” - the Cult of Selfprioritizesthe audience’s experience of the art— “my experience feels authentic” - the Cult of Mediatrusts inthe artistic product, deemphasizing the artist — “the work speaks for itself”
I also think Stefan Klocek’s styles of trust are useful here: Relational trust— “I don’t need to verify.”Operational trust— “I verified this specific thing.”Structural trust— “I could verify if I wanted to.”
Artist-audience and art-audience relational styles
Authenticity is about alignment — between the artist and the art, artist and audience, and art and audience. The audience’s relationship with an artist or artwork influences which style of trust they use to evaluate authorship — and what type of verification and evidence they look for:
- parasocial
- solidarist
- experiential
- reputational
| Parasocial | Solidarist | Experiential | Reputational | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Type of Creators |
influencers, thought leaders, bloggers | artists, creatives, authors | hosts, organizers | creators, publishers, experts, collectives | Type of Audience | followers, fans | supporters, patrons | members, users, “Chat” | viewers / readers, collectors, players | Type of Content* | video, music, podcasts, personal essays | visual arts, fiction, poetry, journalism | livestreams, games, recipes | journalism, education | Media Strategy | narrowcast: connect with committed audience | patronage: bring supporters into semi-private spaces | network: build a community in place | broadcast: reach a wide audience (cross- platform) | How Creators Make Money | | | | |
*Types of artworks that seem naturally well-aligned with the relational style, though probably any artist could adapt any of the relational styles to whatever medium they prefer. I’m basing this on which type of artists and creators I’ve observed tend to use which media styles.
1. Parasocial* relational style #
“But Smitten Kitchen has never lived or died by people typing “best birthday cake recipe” into Google. What [Deb] Perelman has created over the years is a dedicated audience, people who will still type the URL into a web browser every day to see what she’s up to, and who cook whatever she’s posted just because she posted it.”
—[Jaya Saxena]
- Artists foster intimacywith their audience, often by sharing details of their personal lives in addition to their art. - Parasocial relationships affirm authorship through personal trust. - Parasocial relationships are built on relational trust: audiences assess whether the art aligns with their knowledge of the artist as a person.
Parasocial audience needs
The relationship audiences have with creators here is aspirational. Audiences are drawn by **the creator’s vibes. **They admire the artist’s taste, share their values, and want to hear their commentary, opinions, and advice. It’s important for parasocial creators to speak truthfully, sharing genuine beliefs and being consistent in their values. They don’t necessarily have to share their personal lives as long as what they do share reveals something true about them.
In education, researchers found that relational trust between the community and school / teachers builds on four factors (more info); I suspect online audiences’ trust of digital creators builds on these same qualifications. Digital artists with a parasocial artist-audience relationship can earn their audience’s trust by:
-
demonstrating their respect for the audience through transparency- for example, this beauty influencer describes her approach to “ethical influencing”
-
for example, this beauty influencer
-
building personal regard by engaging directly with their audience in a way that’s consistent with their brand - sharing their work and expertise to exhibit competence and taste in their creative field (and beyond)- for example, demonstrating taste, knowledge, and generosity to other indie creators through
-
for example, demonstrating taste, knowledge, and generosity to other indie creators through
-
exercising personal integrity(both in private and publicly) and practicing accountability- for example, when Hank Green’s audience called him out on using genAI in a recent video, he shared how he uses AI in his process, admitted that his family are concerned about his AI usage, thencreated an AI policy for his videos
-
for example, when Hank Green’s audience called him out on
Examples of parasocial creators
Emily Henderson(combined with experiential — her blog has a lively comment section) — an interior design blogger who shares a lot about her family and personal home and promotes lifestyle content — while her company has grown to include multiple writers, she remains the figurehead of the brandFloret Flowers(combined with reputational) — a dahlia grower and seed farm that promotes itsbooks, seedsandworkshopsthroughsocial mediainfluencer launch / gift bundles anda video series— the owner Erin is the focal point for their brand storytelling- Bree of Kit Rocha— one of a self-published Romance writing duo who helps run a massiveannual fundraiser for voting rightsand is involved in a distributedcommunity whistle-printing effort— the labor on display here is solidarist, but it builds the author’s aura rather than verifies the artistic labor
2. Solidarist relational style #
- Artists connect directly with their audiencethrough financial support and providing behind-the-scenes access to thecreative process. - Solidarist relationships verify authorship through process documentation. - Solidarist relationships use operational trust: the artist provides direct evidence of their labor.
Solidarist audience needs
In a solidarist relationship, audiences see creators as workers just like them. They are motivated to support the creator’s work, and want to gain insight into the creative process.
Aesthetics are rooted in value systems, and the Cult of Personality values the artist — specifically, the visible artist. Audiences expect performance online and understand that performance is not intrinsically inauthentic; for creators, “authenticity ceases to be a performed absence of performance and becomes a matter of efficient performance and broad circulation.” (Rob Horning) ** The artist’s labor becomes a signal of trustworthiness. The visibility of an object’s production signals its authenticity and value.
Audiences want to believe that artists are sincere in their work, that they aren’t only making it to sell, that the work genuinely reflects their perspective of the world. RADAR identifies “coherence”
as the new foundation of trust between artists and audiences, rather than traditional markers of authority; artists build trust by “showing your work, revealing your process, and inviting others into the act of sense-making itself.”
Examples of solidarist creators
Austin Kleon— a visual artist and writer who continually shares his ongoing inspiration and thoughts on making — he has literally written multiple books about the creative processCraig Mod(combined with experiential) — a photographer and writer whosupports his workthrough anindependent membership program, along withbook sales— he shares what he’s thinking about creatively inemail newslettersand digitalmaking-of contentHamilton Nolan— an independent journalist focused on Labor issues who offers his work for free while asking for support from those who can afford it — each newsletter has a different point about the importance of solidarity for supporting independent journalism
3. Experiential relational style #
“A recipe in a cookbook is sold on the authority of its author, and on the vision of the book as a whole, but once a recipe breaks free onto the internet, it suddenly has to sell itself. It does this through the photos or the videos, the choice deployment of certain keywords in the name (“cheesy”, “crunchy”, “crispy”, “creamy”), the twist towards superlatives like “the BEST EVER brownies”…”
—[Ruby Tandoh]
- Artists offer their audience belonging through experienceor co-creation of the art andconnection with a community of fans. - Experiential relationships validate authenticity through shared experienceandcommunity affirmation. - Experiential relationships can use either operational trust— someone showed up to host the event — orrelational trust— other people share their experience and judgement of the art (e.g. through reviews, comments, or live chat).
Experiential audience needs
Though artists craft the aesthetic artifact that prompts the audience’s experience, the artist is largely superfluous to the audience. Fundamentally, livestreams demonstrate their authenticity through what Kyle Chayka describes as ** “temporal realness”: either you were there or you weren’t**. Video games can nudge players into flow state, an immersive experience where action becomes effortless because we are using our skills at peak level.
In an experiential relationship, audiences seek the opportunity to participate. That might be direct interactions with the creator / host / emcee or with the community surrounding that creator. For a livestreamer, this means engaging with chat; for a game developer, hosting a forum or Discord server or supporting a modding community; for a food blogger, having a comment section where readers can post questions and reviews of a recipe. (Personally, I rarely leave comments on recipes, but I always read what other people have posted to help validate whether the recipe is good! It makes me wary to cook something from a site that doesn’t accept comments.) Even when the interaction is not real-time, evidence of other people’s experiences adds to the perception of the work as authentic. Creators should do what they can to keep bots out of their chat and spam out of their comments.
The aesthetic experience, artifact, or event validates itself through the audience’s experience, and how the aesthetic experience allows the audience to feel more themselves. Because the aesthetic experience complements (and even expands) the audience’s identity, audiences demand purity from their art so their self is not polluted. People want their aesthetic experiences to align with their self perception. For some people, this means a game made without genAI; for others, this means a recipe made with whole foods or per a strict vegan diet. When Twitch announced they were collecting data to train AI from streamers and their audiences, creators immediately started indicating that they had opted out of AI training. (Website owners have likewise developed No AI badges.)
Examples of experiential creators
Ingrid Fetell Lee(combined with parasocial) — an independent lifestyle creator who hosts workshops and runs a private discussion community that holds regular guest events — she shares stories directly from her life and promotes lifestyle content, but it’s all focused on the audience’s experienceAnne Helen Petersen(combined with solidarist) — an independent journalistfunded by patronswho has built a community with weekly member-only threads dedicated to community discussions
4. Reputational relational style #
Organizations offer way more stability and better work-life balance than entrepreneurship and don’t require a single person to handle everything, so as traditional publications fold and shed staff, some individual creators have been banding together to form indie publications — think
[Defector](https://defector.com),
[Aftermath](https://aftermath.site), and
404 Media. It’s also possible for a solo creator to primarily use a reputational lens, but I suspect harder to pull off in today’s media environment than parasocial or solidarist.
- Audiences rely on brand and institutional reputationthat is grounded intraditional credentials and strong editorial practices. - Reputational relationships are built on transparencyabout the editorial process andrespectfor the brand. - Reputational relationships depend on structural trust: rigorous publisher systems ensure human authorship and high quality work.
Reputational audience needs
A reputational relationship is more formal and traditional; the audience is primarily interested in the aesthetic artifact or conveyed knowledge. It’s not that the creator doesn’t matter with this type of relationship — they do — but the end product is what the audience looks at to judge authenticity. The brand adds imprimatur to the artifact, conveying systemic quality assurance.
Independent creators and collectives need to be open about their processes and quickly respond to any errors. Type foundry Mass-Driver published a philosophical affirmation that they do not use genAI in their process, which also reinforced their expertise by connecting their ethos to type history.
Primarily digital works can produce complementary analog artifacts, which produce traditional aura, to enhance the aura of their digital artifacts, like collectible print versions of ebook-first self-published novels or the print edition of The Onion.
Sometimes indie creative teams will join larger collectives — like Real Time History and Practical Engineering on the streaming collective Nebula — but there is some danger of anchoring one’s artistic brand to a larger institution. Etsy’s quality (and mission) collapse away from handcrafting has them losing sellers — Etsy has tried to staunch the reputational bleeding by emphasizing the entrepreneur as creator, but there’s no assurance that shop owners aren’t just using overseas sweatshops to mass-produce goods for cheap. That lack affects every seller on the site.
Examples of reputational creators
Angine de Poitrine(combined with experiential) — an anonymous musical duo who dress up in costumes for all media appearances, pretend to be aliens (complete with invented language), and never break character — it’s not parasocial because their artistic personas are part of the performance, there is essentially no personal content to attach to, so it all centers on the artNicholas Rougeux(combined with solidarist) — a digital graphic artist who releases projects based on restorations of historic artifacts, with limited personal information about Rougeux, primarily focused on sharing the information and selling associated products like prints, posters, and books —his social mediais almost exclusively process notes and progress updates and he writes up “making of” posts for each project on his blogDerek Guy (The Menswear Guy)(combined with parasocial) — a social media commentator with a deep knowledge of fashion history, opinionated taste, and an incisive wit — the aesthetic artifact that most people are engaging with is social media threads, and though his personality is what makes them fun, what we ultimately trust is his well-sourced knowledgeGarbage Day(combined with experiential) — a journalism collective publishing email newsletters with additional content for paid subscribers, including a Discord server, and offering trend analysis — their research arm / offering reinforces the amount of work they do collecting and analyzing trend data as part of their reportingPBS Eons— a paleontology show with multiple presenters, which accepts direct support from viewers through patronage and occasional merch — we trust the PBS brand for educational content, and their videos include lots of source information