Rosanna Pansino has been sharing her baking creations with the web for over 15 years, hoping to please and encourage with enjoyable creations that embrace a Star Wars Death Star cake and holographic chocolate bars. However in her newest sequence, she has a brand new purpose: “Kick AI’s butt.”
Blame it on the AI slop overwhelming her social media feeds. Pansino used to see posts from actual bakers and buddies; now, they’re being crowded out by AI-generated clips. There’s an entire style of slop movies that characteristic meals, together with a weird pattern of unlikely objects being unfold “satisfyingly” on toast.
She determined to do one thing about it. She would put her years of talent side-by-side with AI to recreate these slop movies in actual life.
As an illustration: a pile of bitter gummy Peach Rings, effortlessly smeared on toast. The AI video regarded easy sufficient, however Pansino wanted to create one thing completely new. She used butter as her base, infused with peach-flavored oil. Yellow and orange meals coloring gave it the correct pastel hues. She rigorously piped the butter into rings utilizing a silicone mould. After they hardened within the freezer, she used uncolored butter to attach two rings collectively in the correct 3D form. The ultimate contact was to dunk them in a mix of sugar and citric acid for that bitter sweet look and style.
It labored. The butter rings have been good replicas of actual sweet rings, and Pansino’s video paralleled the AI model precisely, with the rings easily gliding throughout the toast. Most significantly, she had executed what she got down to do.
“The web is flooded with AI slop, and I needed to discover a strategy to combat again in opposition to it in a enjoyable manner,” Pansino tells me.
It is a uncommon victory for people as AI-generated slop inundates a web-based world that had, as soon as upon a time, been constructed by people for people.
AI technology has been working behind the scenes on the web for years, typically in unnoticeable methods. Then, just a few years in the past, generative AI burst onto the scene, launching a metamorphosis that has unfolded at breakneck velocity. With it got here a flood of AI slop, a time period given to significantly lukewarm AI-generated textual content, photos and movies which might be inescapable on-line, from search engines like google and yahoo to publishing and social media.
“AI slop” is a shabby imitation of content material, typically a pointless, careless regurgitation of current data. It is error-prone, with summaries proudly proclaiming made-up information and papers citing pretend credentials. Pictures are likely to have a slick, plastic veneer, whereas brainrot movies wrestle to obey fundamental legal guidelines of physics. Suppose fake bunnies on trampolines and AI Overviews advising you to put glue on pizza.
The overwhelming majority of US adults who use social media (94%) imagine they see AI-generated content material when scrolling, a new CNET study discovered. Solely 11% discovered it entertaining, helpful or informative.
Slop occurs as a result of AI makes it faster, simpler and cheaper than ever to create content material at an unimaginable scale. OpenAI’s Sora, Google’s Nano Banana and Meta AI create movies, photos and textual content with just a few clicks of a button.
Specialists have loudly voiced considerations about AI’s affect on the environment, the economy, the workforce, misinformation, children and other vulnerable folks. They’ve cited its means to further bias, supercharge scams and hurt human creativity, however nothing has slowed down the fast adoption and scaling of AI. It is overtaking the human creators, artists and writers whose work fuels the very existence of those fashions.
AI slop is an oil spill in our digital oceans, however there are lots of people working to scrub it up. Many are combating for higher methods to determine and label AI content material, from memes to deepfakes. Creators are pushing for higher media literacy and altering how we devour media. Publishers, scientists and researchers are testing new methods to maintain dangerous data from gaining traction and credibility. Builders are constructing havens from slop with AI-free on-line areas. Laws and regulation, or the dearth of it, play a task in every potential answer.
We cannot ever be fully rid of AI, however all these efforts are bringing some humanity again to the web. Pansino’s recreations of AI movies spotlight the painstakingly detailed arduous work that goes into creation, far more than typing a immediate and clicking generate.
“Human creativity is likely one of the most vital issues we’ve got on the planet,” says Pansino. “And if AI drowns that out, what do we’ve got left?”
Creators who push again: ‘AI might by no means’
The web was constructed on movies akin to Charlie Bit My Finger, Grumpy Cat and the Evolution of Dance. Now, we’ve got movies of AI-generated cats forming a feline tower and “Feel the AGI” memes. These innocuous AI posts are why some folks on social media see slop as leisure or a new kind of internet culture. Even when movies are very clearly AI, folks do not at all times thoughts in the event that they’re perceived as innocent enjoyable. However slop isn’t benign.
You see slop as a result of it is being compelled upon you — not since you’ve indicated to the algorithms that you simply like it. In the event you have been to enroll in a brand new YouTube account at this time, a 3rd of the primary 500 YouTube Shorts proven to you’d be some type of AI slop content material, in response to a report from Kapwing, a maker of on-line video instruments. There are over 1.3 billion movies labeled as AI-generated on TikTok as of February. Slop is baked into our scrolling the identical manner microplastics are a default ingredient in our meals.
Pansino compares her expertise recreating AI meals slop movies to an episode of The Workplace. In it, Dwight is competing with the corporate’s new web site to see if he could make extra gross sales.
“Dwight, single-handedly, is outselling the web site — he is competing in opposition to the machine,” Pansino says. “That is what I really feel like once I’m baking in opposition to AI. It is a good rush.”
(The Workplace followers might recall that Dwight wins on the finish of the episode, and later, due to huge errors and fraud, the location’s creator, Ryan, is fired.)
Her 21 million-plus followers throughout YouTube, Instagram and TikTok have cheered on her AI recreation sequence, which Pansino attributes to their very own frustrations with seeing slop on their feeds. Plus, her creations are literally edible.
“We’re getting dimensions that AI might by no means,” she says.
Different creators have emerged as “actuality checkers.” Jeremy Carrasco (@showtoolsai) makes use of his background as a technical video producer to debunk viral AI movies. His group would livestream occasions for companies, working to keep away from errors, which has helped him extra simply spot when AI erroneously mimics video qualities akin to lens flares. His academic movies assist his greater than 870,000 Instagram, YouTube and TikTok followers acknowledge these abnormalities.
Analyzing a video’s context, Carrasco factors out telltale indicators of generative AI akin to bizarre leap cuts and continuity points. He additionally finds the primary time a video was shared by an actual individual or a slop account. Everybody can do that, however it’s arduous while you’re being “emotionally baited” by slop, Carrasco says.
“Most individuals aren’t spending their time analyzing movies like I’m. So if it hits their unconscious [signaling], ‘This seems to be actual,’ their mind would possibly shut off there,” Carrasco says.
Slop producers don’t need you to second-guess what you are seeing. They need you to get emotional — whether or not that is delighted by bunnies on a trampoline or outraged by political memes — and to argue within the feedback and share the movies with your folks. The purpose for a lot of producers of AI slop is engagement and, subsequently, monetization. The Kapwing report estimates the highest slop accounts are pulling in tens of millions of {dollars} of advert earnings per 12 months. They’re similar to the unique engagement farmers and ragebaiters on Twitter. What’s previous is now AI-powered.
Seeing is not believing. What now?
It may be tough for the web platforms we depend on to determine AI photos and movies. To weed out the worst offenders, the accounts that mass-produce sloppy spam, some platforms encourage their actual customers so as to add verifications to their accounts. LinkedIn has had some success right here, with over 100 million of its members including these new verifications. However AI makes it arduous to maintain up.
Individuals are utilizing AI-powered group automation instruments to make AI-generated posts and depart feedback throughout lots of of random accounts in a fraction of the time it could take to take action manually. Teams of those customers are known as engagement pods, Oscar Rodriguez, vice chairman of belief merchandise at LinkedIn, tells me. The corporate has eliminated “lots of of LinkedIn teams” that show these engagement-farming behaviors in simply the previous few months, however figuring out them is difficult.
“There is no such thing as a one sign that I can let you know that positively makes [an account] inauthentic or pretend, however it’s a mix of various alerts, the habits of the accounts,” says Rodriguez.
Take AI-generated photos, for instance. Many individuals use AI to create new headshots to keep away from paying for pricey photoshoots, and it is not in opposition to LinkedIn’s guidelines to make use of them as profile footage. So an AI headshot alone is not sufficient to warrant suspicion. But when an account has an AI profile picture and has different warning indicators — like commenting extra ceaselessly than LinkedIn internally is aware of is typical for human customers — that raises purple flags, Rodriguez says.
To identify AI content material, platforms depend on labeling and watermarking. Labeling requires folks to reveal that their work was made with AI. In the event you do not, monitoring methods can try and flag it themselves. One of many strongest alerts these methods depend on is watermarks, that are invisible signatures utilized throughout content material creation and hidden in a bit of content material’s metadata. They offer you extra details about how and when one thing was created.
Most watermarking strategies concentrate on two areas: {hardware} corporations authenticating actual content material because it’s captured, and AI corporations embedding alerts into their artificial, AI-generated media when it is created. The Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity is a serious advocacy group making an attempt to standardize how artificial media is watermarked with content credentials.
Many, however not all, AI fashions are appropriate with the C2PA’s framework. Which means its verification instrument cannot flag every bit of AI-generated media, which creates inconsistency and confusion. Half of US social media customers (51%) need higher labeling, CNET discovered. That is why different options are within the works to fill the gaps.
Abe Davis, a pc science professor at Cornell College, led a group that developed a strategy to embed watermarks in mild. All that is wanted is to activate a lamp that makes use of the mandatory chip to run the code. This process is named noise-coded illumination. Any digital camera that captures video footage of an occasion the place the sunshine is shining will robotically add the watermark.
“As a substitute of making use of the watermark to information that is captured by a particular digital camera, [noise-coded illumination] applies it to the sunshine atmosphere. Any digital camera that is recording that mild goes to document the watermark,” Davis says.
The watermark is hidden within the mild’s frequencies, unfold throughout a video, undetectable to the human eye and tough to take away. These with the key code can decode the watermark and see what components of a video or picture have been manipulated, right down to the pixel degree. This could be particularly useful for dwell occasions, like political rallies and press conferences, the place the audio system are targets for deepfakes.
Although it is not but commercially accessible, the analysis exhibits the totally different alternatives so as to add an additional layer of safety from AI. Watermarking is a type of collective motion drawback, Davis says. Everybody would profit if we applied all these approaches, however nobody particular person advantages sufficient. That is why we’ve got haphazard efforts unfold throughout a number of industries which might be extremely aggressive and quickly altering.
Labeling and watermarking are vital instruments within the combat in opposition to slop, however they will not be sufficient on their very own. Merely having AI labeled would not cease it from filling our lives. However it’s a obligatory first step.
Publishing pains
In the event you assume it is simpler to single out AI-generated textual content than photos or movies, assume once more. Publishing is likely one of the largest targets of AI slop after social media. Chatbots and Google’s AI Overviews eat up articles from news sources and other digital publications and spit out wonky and doubtlessly copyright-infringing outcomes. AI-powered translation and record-keeping instruments threaten the work of translators and historians, however the tech’s superficial understanding of cultures and nuances makes it a poor substitute.
Slop is very pervasive in tutorial publishing. In a “publish or perish” tradition like academia, a few of it could be unintentionally or mistakenly created, particularly by first-time researchers and writers. However it’s slipping into the mainstream journals, like a now-retracted research that went viral for together with an clearly incorrect, overly phallic AI-generated picture of a rat’s reproductive system with many typos. That is one instance, albeit a hilarious and simply recognizable one, of how AI is turbocharging dangerous analysis, significantly for corporations that promote pretend analysis to tutorial publishers, often known as paper mills.
The revered and extensively used prepublication database arXiv is likely one of the largest targets for AI slop. Editorial director Ramin Zabih and scientific director Steinn Sigurdsson inform me that submissions usually improve about 20% every year; now, it is getting “worrisomely sooner,” Zabih says. AI is accountable, they are saying.
ArXiv will get round 2,000 submissions a day, half of that are revisions. It has automated screening instruments to weed out essentially the most clearly fraudulent or AI-generated research, however it closely depends on lots of of volunteers who assessment the remaining papers in response to their areas of experience. It is also needed to tighten its submission tips, adopting an endorsement system to make sure solely actual folks can share analysis. It is not an ideal repair, Sigurdsson acknowledges, however it’s essential to “stem the flood” of scientific slop.
“The corpus of science is getting diluted. Plenty of the AI stuff is both actively unsuitable or it is meaningless. It is simply noise,” says Sigurdsson. “It makes it tougher to search out what’s actually taking place, and it might misdirect folks.”
There’s been a lot slop that one analysis group used these fraudulent papers to construct a machine learning tool that may acknowledge it. Adrian Barnett, a statistician and researcher at Queensland College of Expertise, was a part of the group that used retracted journal papers to coach a language mannequin to identify pretend and doubtlessly AI-generated research, particularly for most cancers analysis, sadly a excessive goal space.
Paper mill-created articles “have the appearance of a paper,” Barnett says. “They know what a paper ought to appear to be, after which they spin the wheel. They could change the illness, they will change a protein, they will change a gene and presto, you’ve got received a brand new paper.”
The instrument acts as a type of scientific spam filter. It identifies patterns, like generally used phrases, within the templates that chatbots and human fabricators depend on to imitate academia’s model. It is one instance of how AI expertise itself is getting used to combat slop — AI versus AI, in lots of circumstances. However like different AI verification instruments, it is restricted; it might solely determine the templates it was educated on. That is why human oversight is very vital.
People have intestine instincts and material experience that AI would not. For instance, arXiv’s moderators flagged a pretend sequence of submissions as a result of the authors’ names caught out to them as too stereotypically British, like characters from Jane Eyre. However the demand for human evaluations results in danger of a “demise spiral,” Zahib mentioned, the place reviewers’ workloads get bigger and extra disagreeable, which causes them to cease reviewing, including stress to remaining reviewers.
“There is a little bit of an arms race between writing [AI] content material and instruments for robotically figuring out it,” Zahib says. “However at this cut-off date, I hate to say this, it is a battle we’re dropping slowly.”
Can there be a secure haven from slop?
A part of the issue with slop — if not the complete drawback — is that the handful of corporations that run our on-line lives are additionally those constructing AI. Meta slammed its AI into Instagram and Fb. Google built-in Gemini into each section of its huge enterprise, from search to smartphones. X is virtually inseparable from Grok. It is very tough, and in some circumstances unattainable, to show off AI on sure gadgets and websites. Tech giants say they’re including AI to enhance our expertise. However which means they’ve a fairly large battle of curiosity in relation to reining in slop.
They’re determined to show their AI fashions are wanted and work nicely. We are the guinea pigs used to inflate their utilization stats for his or her quarterly investor conferences. Whereas some corporations have launched instruments to assist cope with slop, it is not almost sufficient. They are not overly thinking about serving to remedy the issue they created.
“You can not separate the platforms from the folks making the AI,” Carrasco says. “Do I belief [tech companies] to have the correct compass about AI? No, under no circumstances.”
Meta and TikTok declined to touch upon the document about efforts to rein in AI-generated content material. YouTube spokesperson Boot Bullwinkle mentioned, “AI is a instrument for creativity, however it’s not a shortcut for high quality,” and that to prioritize high quality experiences, the corporate is “much less prone to suggest low-quality or repetitive content material.”
Different corporations are swerving in the other way. DiVine is one of some AI-free social media apps, a reimagining of Vine, the short-lived quick video service that predated TikTok. Created by Evan Henshaw-Plath, with funding from Twitter creator Jack Dorsey, the brand new video app will embrace an archive of over 10,000 Vines from the unique app — no want to search out these Vine compilations on YouTube. It is an interesting mix of nostalgia for a less-complicated web and another actuality the place slop hasn’t taken over.
“We’re not anti-AI,” DiVine chief advertising officer Alice Chan says. “We simply assume that individuals deserve a spot they will come the place there is a excessive degree of belief that the content material they’re seeing is actual and made by actual folks.”
To maintain AI movies off the platform, the corporate is working with The Guardian Venture to make use of its identification system known as proof mode, constructed on high of the C2PA framework, that verifies human-created content material. It additionally plans to work with AI labs to “design checks … that have a look at the underlying construction of those movies,” Henshaw-Plath mentioned in a podcast earlier this 12 months. DiVine customers can even be capable to report in the event that they see AI movies, although it will not permit video uploads when it launches, which ought to assist stop slop from slipping via.
Authenticity issues now greater than ever, and social media executives understand it. On New 12 months’s Eve, Instagram chief Adam Mosseri wrote a prolonged post about needing to return to a “uncooked” and “imperfect” aesthetic, criticizing AI slop and defending AI use in the identical paragraph. YouTube CEO Neal Mohan began 2026 with a letter explicitly stating slop is a matter and that platforms should be “decreasing the unfold of low-quality, repetitive content material.”
However it’s arduous to think about platforms like Instagram and YouTube will be capable to return to a very people-centric, genuine and actual tradition so long as they depend on algorithmic curation of really helpful content material, push AI options and permit folks to share completely AI-generated posts. Apps like Vine, which by no means demanded perfection or developed AI, may need a combating likelihood.
Slopaganda and the messy internet of AI in politics
AI is an influence participant in politics, liable for creating a strong new aesthetic and influencing opinions, culminating in what’s known as slopaganda — AI content material particularly shared to control beliefs to attain political ends, as one early study places it.
AI is already an efficient instrument for influencing our beliefs, in response to a recent Stanford University study. Researchers needed to grasp whether or not folks might determine political messages written by AI and measure how efficient they’re in influencing beliefs. When studying an AI-created message, the overwhelming majority of respondents (94%) could not inform. These AI-generated political messages have been additionally as persuasive as these written by people.
“It is fairly tough to craft these persuasive messages in a manner that resonates with folks,” says Jan Voelkel, one of many research’s authors. “We thought this was fairly a excessive bar for giant language fashions to attain, and we have been stunned by the truth that they have been already doing so nicely.”
It is not essentially a foul factor that AI can craft influential political messages when executed responsibly. However AI can be utilized by dangerous actors to unfold misinformation, Voelkel says. The danger is that one-person misinformation groups can use AI to sway folks’s opinions whereas working extra effectively than earlier than.
A method we see the affect and normalization of slop in politics is with imagery. AI memes are a brand new type of political commentary, as demonstrated by President Donald Trump and his administration: The White Home’s AI image of a woman crying while being deported; Trump’s AI cartoon video of himself wearing a crown and flying a fighter jet after nationwide “No Kings” protests; Protection Secretary Pete Hegseth’s parody guide cowl of Franklin the Turtle holding a machine gun taking pictures at overseas boats; an AI-edited image that altered a lady’s face to look as if she was crying after being arrested for protesting Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Governments have the facility to find out whether or not and easy methods to regulate AI. However legislative efforts have been haphazard and scattered. Particular person states have taken motion, as within the case of California’s AI Transparency Act, Illinois’ limits on AI therapy, Colorado’s algorithmic discrimination guidelines and extra. However these legal guidelines are caught in a battle between the states and the federal authorities.
Trump mentioned patchwork state regulation will stop the US from “successful” the worldwide AI race by slowing down innovation, which is why the Division of Justice shaped a task force to crack down on state AI laws. The administration’s AI Action Plan, in the meantime, requires slashing laws for AI data centers and proposes a brand new framework to make sure AI fashions are “free from top-down ideological bias,” although it is unclear how that may play out.
Tech leaders like Apple’s Tim Prepare dinner, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, Microsoft’s Invoice Gates and Alphabet’s Sundar Pichai have met with Trump multiple times since he took workplace. With an more and more cozy relationship to the White Home, Google and OpenAI have welcomed the push to chop authorized purple tape round AI improvement.
Whereas governments dither on regulation, tech corporations have free rein to proceed as they please, frivolously constrained by just a few AI-specific legal guidelines. Complete, enforceable laws might management the fireplace hose of harmful slop, however as of now, the folks liable for it are both unable or unwilling to take action. This has by no means been clearer than with the rise of AI deepfakes and AI-powered image-based abuse.
Deepfakes: Faux content material, actual hurt
Deepfakes are essentially the most insidious type of AI slop. They’re photos and movies so reasonable we won’t inform whether or not they’re actual or AI-generated.
We had deepfakes earlier than we had AI. However pre-AI deepfakes have been costly to create, required specialised abilities and weren’t at all times plausible. AI modifications that, with newer fashions creating content material that is indistinguishable from actuality. AI democratized deepfakes, and we’re all worse off for it.
AI’s means to supply abusive or unlawful content material has lengthy been a priority. It is why almost all AI corporations embrace insurance policies outlawing these makes use of. However we have already seen that their methods meant to stop abuse aren’t good.
Take OpenAI’s Sora app, for instance. The app exploded in recognition final fall, letting you make movies that includes your personal face and voice and the likenesses of others. Celebrities and public figures shortly requested OpenAI to stop harmful depictions of them. Bryan Cranston, the actors’ union SAG-AFTRA and the property of Martin Luther King Jr. all reached out with their considerations to the corporate with considerations, which promised to construct stronger safeguards.
(Disclosure: Ziff Davis, CNET’s dad or mum firm, in 2025 filed a lawsuit in opposition to OpenAI, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in coaching and working its AI methods.)
Sora requires your consent earlier than letting different folks use your likeness. Grok, the AI instrument made by Elon Musk’s xAI, doesn’t. That is how folks have been in a position to make use of Grok to make AI-generated nonconsensual intimate imagery.
From late December into early January, a rush of X customers requested Grok to create photos that undress or nudify folks in pictures shared by others, primarily ladies. Over a nine-day interval, Grok created 4.4 million photos, of which 1.8 million have been sexual, in response to a New York Times report. The Heart on Countering Digital Hate did the same study, which estimated that Grok made roughly 3 million sexualized photos over 11 days, with 23,000 of these deepfake porn photos together with kids.
That is tens of millions of incidents of harassment that have been enabled and effectively automated by AI. The dehumanizing pattern highlighted how simple it’s for AI to be weaponized for harassment.
“The perpetrator may be actually anybody, and the sufferer could possibly be actually anybody. When you’ve got a photograph on-line, you might be a sufferer of this now,” says Dani Pinter, chief authorized officer on the National Center on Sexual Exploitation.
X didn’t reply to a number of requests for remark.
Deepfakes and nonconsensual intimate imagery are illegal below the 2025 Take It Down Act, however it additionally gave platforms a grace interval (till Might) to arrange processes to take down illicit photos. The enforcement mechanisms within the legislation solely permit for the DOJ and the Federal Commerce Fee to research the businesses, Pinter says, not for people to sue perpetrators or tech corporations. Neither group has opened an investigation but.
Deepfakes hit on a core challenge with AI slop: our lack of management. We all know AI can be utilized for malicious functions, however we do not have many particular person levers to tug to combat again. Even trying on the huge image, there’s a lot turmoil round AI laws that we’re largely compelled to depend on the folks constructing AI to make sure it is secure. The present guardrails would possibly work typically, however clearly not on a regular basis.
Grok’s AI image-based sexual abuse was “so foreseeable and so preventable,” Pinter says.
“In the event you designed a automobile, and also you did not even examine if sure tools would explode, you’d be sued to oblivion,” Pinter says. “That may be a fundamental backside line: Affordable habits by a company entity … It is like [xAI] did not even try this fundamental factor.”
The story of AI slop, together with deepfakes, is one in every of AI enabling the very worst of the web: scams, spam and abuse. If there’s a optimistic aspect, it is that we’re not but on the finish of the story. Many teams, advocates and researchers are dedicated to combating AI-powered abuse, whether or not that is via new legal guidelines, new guidelines or higher expertise.
Combating an uphill battle
Almost each tech government who’s constructing AI rationalizes that AI is just the newest instrument that may make your life simpler. There’s some fact to that; AI will most likely result in welcome progress in medication and manufacturing, for instance. However we have seen that it is a frighteningly environment friendly instrument for fraud, misinformation and abuse. So the place does that depart us, as slop gushes into our lives with no reduction valve in sight?
We’re by no means getting the pre-AI web again. The combat in opposition to AI slop is a combat to maintain the web human, one we’d like now greater than ever. The web is inextricably intertwined with our humanity, and we’re inundated with a lot pretend content material that we’re ravenous for something actual. Buying and selling instantaneous gratification and the sycophancy of AI for on-line experiences which might be rooted in actuality, perhaps with somewhat extra friction but in addition much more authenticity — that is how we get again to utilizing the web in ways in which give to us slightly than drain us.
If we do not, we could also be headed for a very dead internet, the place AI brokers work together with one another to present the phantasm of exercise and connection.
Substituting AI for humanity will not work. We have already realized this lesson with social media. The AI slop ocean that was once social media is driving us farther from the tech’s authentic goal: connecting folks.
“AI slop is actively making an attempt to destroy that. It is actively making an attempt to switch that a part of your feed as a result of your consideration is proscribed, and it’s actively taking away the connections that you simply had,” Carrasco says. “I hope that AI video and AI slop make folks get up to how far we drifted.”
Artwork Director | Jeffrey Hazelwood
Artistic Director | Viva Tung
Video Presenter | Katelyn Chedraoui
Video Editor | JD Christison
Venture Supervisor | Danielle Ramirez
Editors | Corinne Reichert and Jon Reed
Director of Content material | Jonathan Skillings
