The world will reject AI slop as investors bet on humanity
AI slop is widely predicted to overrun the creative industries. But some of the world's richest people are betting against that. Ordinary investors should do the same
Get the latest financial news, insights and expert analysis from our award-winning MoneyWeek team, to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Want to add more newsletters?
It is an audacious bid. Through his hedge fund Pershing Square, Bill Ackman has offered $64 billion for Universal Music, one of the largest music conglomerates in the world and a producer for artists including Taylor Swift.
It is a complex deal involving both cash and shares and would move the company's listing from Amsterdam to New York.
It remains to be seen whether the deal is successful or not. The decision will probably rest with French billionaire Vincent Bolloré, who controls 18% of the company, and on its British chief executive Lucian Grainge, who is widely credited with managing the transition from analogue to digital music. Predictions markets are giving the bid a 37% chance of success by 30 June.
Try 6 free issues of MoneyWeek today
Get unparalleled financial insight, analysis and expert opinion you can profit from.
Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
It is far from the only recent media megadeal. After a battle with Netflix, Paramount Skydance, which is controlled and financed by the Ellison family, has agreed to pay more than $100 billion for Warner Bros, the studio that controls a huge library of films, along with news channel CNN and sports broadcaster TNT. It still needs regulatory approval in the markets where it operates, but the deal is agreed, and there is little to stop it from happening now.
Investors are betting against AI slop
There is a common theme to both major bids. Huge sums of money are being wagered on the proposition that the arts will still be created and controlled by humans. That goes against the hype in the rest of the market.
We have read huge amounts about the rise of AI and the vast sums being poured into the software and data centres that will power super-smart chatbots. The leading companies in the sector, such as OpenAI and Anthropic, may well be worth more than $1 trillion if they list their shares later this year, while established giants such as Google, Meta and Elon Musk's X have been pouring fortunes into developing their own systems.
The creative industries are meant to be right in the firing line to be replaced by AI. The bots are good at generating music tracks that can be surprisingly popular. There have been plenty of AI-generated songs that have topped the streaming charts, and the likes of ChatGPT and Google Gemini offer music-generating tools. It is not hard to choose a genre, come up with a theme, and then upload a track onto Spotify or Google Music. It can be very lucrative.
Likewise, AI actors can replace real ones, and the same is true of scriptwriters, technicians and directors. Indeed, Netflix last month paid $600 million for InterPositive, an AI start-up developing post-production tools for the film industry, backed by the actor Ben Affleck. There are already reports of AI helping with scripts, and it may not be long before the bots are up on the big screen.
So why would anyone in their right mind want to pay tens of billions for a film studio or a music label? After all, there is not much value in a studio if films can be created by anyone with a laptop and a subscription to ChatGPT or Claude AI.
Conventional wisdom says the world will soon be flooded with AI slop – films of every conceivable genre, written for you, directed in any style you choose, and acted by AI-generated bots, or else by digitally recreated megastars from the past. Every taste will be catered to, and it may not be long before you can choose from a range of plot twists or endings depending on your personal taste. Traditional films will be finished.
Likewise, the streaming apps will also soon be flooded with AI slop – Taylor Swift knockoffs, along with tracks from every possible musical style, from classical to jazz to soul. We will all be able to create our own personal track-lists, made up of a mash-up of styles, singers and musicians precisely tailored to our own tastes or mood.
Taylor Swift need not worry about the bots
AI slop cannot create anything new
Well, perhaps. Yet the billionaire bidders for Warner and Universal are clearly on to something. In the end, human creativity will survive. The chatbots can recreate plots or tunes that already exist, study the libraries and rustle up a reasonable facsimile. But they can't create anything new; they don't have personality, they don't have any insight into our feelings, and they are never going to be able to make us laugh, cry or dance.
The chatbots might change the way industries function, but they are unlikely to destroy them. Investors are pouring huge sums of money into AI start-ups, confident that the systems will be able to replace just about any form of human endeavour.
Some of the world's richest people are betting the other way – against the triumph of AI slop. So should ordinary investors.
This article was first published in MoneyWeek's magazine. Enjoy exclusive early access to news, opinion and analysis from our team of financial experts with a MoneyWeek subscription.
Get the latest financial news, insights and expert analysis from our award-winning MoneyWeek team, to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.

Matthew Lynn is a columnist for Bloomberg and writes weekly commentary syndicated in papers such as the Daily Telegraph, Die Welt, the Sydney Morning Herald, the South China Morning Post and the Miami Herald. He is also an associate editor of Spectator Business, and a regular contributor to The Spectator. Before that, he worked for the business section of the Sunday Times for ten years.