Image licensed via Adobe Stock
Taking a stance on generative AI might feel good, but could it lose you clients? Here’s what our community has to say about this divisive issue.
Welcome to another edition of Dear Boom, our advice series where the creative community tackles the thorniest questions facing our industry. This week’s dilemma is perhaps the most divisive yet. “I’m a freelance designer, and I’m openly uncomfortable with generative AI,” writes an anonymous creative. “Not because I hate technology, but because of its ethical, environmental and societal impact in its current form.
“I want to work with clients who value human creativity, empathy and care,” they continue. “But I’m worried that being public about my stance could look like virtue signalling, or make me seem out of touch. Could speaking out actually harm my business? Or might it help me attract the right clients instead?”
The response from our community on Instagram and The Studio was immediate and passionate. What emerged wasn’t one simple answer, but a roadmap for thinking through one of the most consequential decisions facing us today.
Authenticity attracts your people
The most consistent advice from our community? Don’t try to appeal to everyone. Designer and illustrator Mel Langton spent two days talking with the BBC about AI, feeling anxious about putting her views out there. Her conclusion? “As long as I’m only giving my own opinions and staying true to what I believe, then I’m only ever going to attract the kind of people whose views resonate with mine. And at the end of the day, they’re the kind of people I want to work with.”
Mel acknowledges AI has uses for many people, but she has “issues with the ethics and the complete lack of regulation, plus artists and creators now being accused of using it when they aren’t. It’s a bit of a bin fire, I guess, and it is hard to know what’s best to do, but if there’s something that doesn’t sit right with your own views or ethics, and especially if you feel passionate about it, I think speaking up isn’t a bad thing. If you try to appeal to everyone, you’ll appeal to no one.”
Graphic designer and illustrator Pearse O’Halloran takes a similar line. “Having genuine concerns about the ethical impact of AI is a positive for you as a professional,” he argues. “Weighing ethics against financial gain shows you to be compassionate and thoughtful, which are traits a client should look for in addition to your creative skills.
“The rules of attraction are very powerful,” he adds. “If you show yourself to have a considered approach and not in it for a quick buck, you will attract clients with similar views, and those are the ones you want.”
Designer Max Hofert is perhaps the most emphatic on this. “No, it’s not risky,” he stresses. “My studio’s business is booming, and we are 100% anti-generative AI, and loud about it. We are not anti-innovation; we are pro-ethics. These technologies are wildly exploitative, dangerous, and morally corrupt. You risk your business using them, not the opposite.”
Show, not tell?
Not everyone felt that taking a public stance was wise, however. Some creatives argued that making AI a defining part of your public identity risks oversimplifying a complex issue or alienating clients who haven’t yet formed strong opinions either way. Some pointed out that many technologies now taken for granted—from Photoshop to digital photography—were once met with similar resistance, and warned that an outright rejection of AI could leave creatives unprepared for how the industry ultimately evolves.
Others urged a more pragmatic, systemic view, suggesting the real problem isn’t individual freelancers’ stances but the economic pressures driving AI adoption in the first place. In a climate shaped by shrinking budgets, tighter deadlines and widespread uncertainty, they argued that engaging critically with AI—rather than ignoring it—may be a more effective way to influence how it’s used, regulated and improved, while still protecting human creativity and values.
Graphic designer and illustrator Nvard Yerkanian is among those cautioning against making your entire identity about opposition to AI. As she puts it: “AI is a tool, not a position one has to take. It’s up to each creative to decide whether and how to use it. What I’ve noticed is that actively showing the value of human creativity is far more powerful than speaking out against AI-generated work.
“There is a huge market for human-made art and design,” she continues. “Clients who value human depth, emotion and connection are actively seeking it. Even companies deeply involved in AI still rely on human-created work when they want storytelling, sensitivity or cultural resonance. So instead of framing yourself as ‘against AI’, I’d focus on what you stand for: authenticity, authorship, empathy, and craft.”
Gen AI vs general AI
One difficulty with this argument is that ‘generative AI’ and ‘AI in general’ start to blur in people’s minds. But in reality, many people who oppose the former welcome the latter.
“I understand the hesitation with AI,” says graphic designer Meredith Blumenfeld. “It’s new, it’s uncomfortable, it’s morally ambiguous. At first glance, I think a lot of us feel uneasy about it. I’ve had a bit of a mindset shift, though, when I started viewing AI as a tool that can help alleviate a lot of pain points in my current workflow.”
She’s talking about using AI for menial tasks; reformatting spreadsheets, processing art files, and so on. “I am not in favour of AI replacing the brainstorming or creative process by any means,” Meredith stresses. “But if it allows me to do more of that by freeing up my time spent on menial tasks, I am all for it.”
Similarly, portraitist Linda Brogan says: “I use AI as a generous tool. Who else is going to spend three solid hours with me, giving me ideas and asking whether I want to work on it this way? It saves months of trial and error as I slowly work out my pitch. Then I can apply my brainstorming to its generic, expected answers. Like grafting a plant, and shedding it when my plant has grown.”
At the same time, when it comes to finished work, Linda believes that people will always want bespoke. “That’s the point of art. It is one heart talking to another. There is something in the magic of art that you cannot falsely replicate.”
The long view
Ultimately, there’s no one-size-fits-all answer here. Should you speak out, or keep quiet? There are pros and cons to each approach. But perhaps designer Weston Sanders puts it best when he says: “I’d encourage anyone to stay true to oneself, even if it costs you a client or a project. Wouldn’t you make a similar judgment call for work you didn’t want to do, or for a client who wouldn’t compensate you fairly? I am personally outspoken on disliking generative AI, specifically, in my design job.”
The creative industry has always been about making choices. About the work we take, the clients we serve, and the methods we employ. AI is simply the latest decision that defines not just our businesses, but who we are as practitioners. So whatever your view and whether you decide to share it, choose authentically, communicate clearly, and trust that the right clients will find you.
​Â
