Rainbow warned its models that AI meant fewer jobs. Then their doppelgängers appeared.

Last June, models working for the fashion retailer Rainbow received a stark warning: the rise of artificial intelligence was on the horizon, signaling a potential reduction in job opportunities. Phil Caraway, the studio manager, communicated that the company was starting to utilize AI for styling products and generating avatars. While he could not guarantee job losses, he urged models to prepare for a future with fewer positions available. As the months unfolded, many models reported feelings of anxiety and frustration as they witnessed AI-generated doppelgängers appearing alongside their own work. With the company increasingly relying on synthetic models, the number of human models employed began to dwindle. By March of this year, models noticed marketing images on Rainbow's platforms that bore a striking resemblance to them, but featured different poses and settings. Speculation grew that these lookalikes were created using AI technology. This shift in the modeling landscape has sparked a wave of concern among workers. A study from the Worker Institute at Cornell University highlighted that e-commerce roles, such as modeling, are particularly susceptible to being replaced by AI. As the fashion industry embraces these technologies, the implications for human jobs become increasingly complex. Rainbow, which boasts over 800 locations nationwide, has faced scrutiny from its models regarding the use of AI-generated images. Many models expressed their disappointment and confusion as they began to see AI replicas of themselves in promotional materials. Some have even taken legal action, alleging that their likenesses were used without proper authorization. Francheska Pujols, one such model, filed a lawsuit claiming defamation and confusion stemming from the use of her altered images. In response to the growing backlash, Rainbow has made attempts to clarify its stance on the use of AI in its operations. The company’s chief digital officer, David Cost, insisted that Rainbow is committed to using emerging technologies responsibly and in accordance with agreements signed by models. However, many employees have voiced concerns about the implications of new contract clauses that grant the company broad rights to utilize AI technologies. As negotiations between models and the company continue, the fate of human modeling work hangs in the balance. Rainbow's approach to integrating AI raises vital questions about the future of employment in the creative industries, where the line between human and synthetic representation continues to blur. With some human models being rehired under new contracts that prohibit the creation of digital replicas, the ongoing transition underscores the challenges the fashion industry faces amidst advancing technology.