favicon

T4K3.news

YouTube edits Shorts with AI without consent

BBC reports YouTube is testing AI edits on Shorts without notifying creators, raising questions about consent and transparency.

August 25, 2025 at 02:01 PM
blur YouTube is Secretly Editing Users’ Videos Without Their Consent

BBC reports YouTube quietly uses AI to edit Shorts without notifying creators, prompting questions about consent and platform transparency.

YouTube Edits Creators Videos With AI Without Consent

BBC reports that YouTube has quietly used AI to edit Shorts without informing creators. The edits are described as small and often hard to spot without side by side comparisons, such as sharper wrinkles, smoother skin, or warped ears. Content creators like Rhett Shull note the differences and show that the same video looks different on YouTube and Instagram, with the Shorts version appearing more polished. He says, I did not consent to this.

YouTube has now confirmed an experiment on a limited number of Shorts, using traditional machine learning to unblur, denoise and improve clarity during processing, similar to what a modern smartphone does when recording a video. The company says it aims to provide the best video quality and experience, and will consider creator and viewer feedback as it iterates. It did not specify whether creators will be able to disable the edits, and BBC reporters point out that changing videos without notice could undermine trust in what people see online. The wider backdrop includes reports that Google uses YouTube videos to train its AI models, adding another layer to debates about data use and algorithmic editing.

Key Takeaways

✔️
YouTube is running an AI edit experiment on a subset of Shorts
✔️
Creators report edits occur without explicit consent or opt-out
✔️
Edits focus on unblurring, denoising and smoothing for clarity
✔️
The platform frames edits as quality improvements
✔️
Public trust in creator autonomy could be affected
✔️
This ties to broader AI use concerns and data practices on the platform
✔️
Policy questions about consent and transparency are likely to rise

"I did not consent to this"

Rhett Shull on lack of consent for AI edits

"Replacing or enhancing my work with AI upscaling erodes trust"

Shull on impact of AI edits on trust

"Transparency on how edits happen is essential for creators"

Editorial stance on disclosure and process

"AI should enhance the creator not rewrite the work"

Editorial note on preserving authorial voice

The issue tests a core question for platforms: who controls the creator’s voice once AI gets involved? If edits happen without clear consent or opt-out options, audiences may start seeing a version of a video that does not reflect the creator’s original intent. That harms both trust and authorial autonomy. At the same time, platforms argue that the edits are tools for quality and viewing experience. The case pushes policymakers to consider clearer rules on consent, transparency, and user rights in AI assisted editing. It also highlights a tension between innovation and accountability on a global stage.

Highlights

  • I did not consent to this
  • Trust is earned one video at a time
  • Editing without notice erodes the creator's voice
  • Transparency on edits is essential for creators

Creator trust and consent under AI edits

The practice raises sensitive issues about consent, transparency, and the integrity of creator voice. If edits are applied without opt-out options or clear disclosure, it could trigger public backlash, regulatory scrutiny, and ongoing distrust in the platform.

As this space evolves, clear rules will shape how creators and audiences navigate AI driven edits.

Enjoyed this? Let your friends know!

Related News