Voice From the Grave: Netflix’s AI Clone of Murdered Influencer Sparks Outrage

TL;DR – What You Need to Know in 30 Seconds

1. Gabby Petito’s Voice Cloned by AI: Netflix used generative AI to replicate the murdered influencer’s voice, narrating her own texts and journals in American Murder: Gabby Petito.
2. Massive Public Outcry: Viewers say it’s “deeply unsettling,” violating a murder victim’s memory without her explicit consent.
3. Family Approved – But Is That Enough? Gabby’s parents supposedly supported the decision, but critics argue that the emotional authenticity just isn’t there and it sets an alarming precedent.
4. Growing Trend in AI ‘Docu-Fiction’: Netflix has toyed with AI imagery before. With the rising popularity of AI tools, this might just be the beginning of posthumous voice cloning in media.

Netflix’s AI Voice Recreation of Gabby Petito Sparks Outrage: The True Crime Documentary Stirs Ethical Concerns

In a world where true crime has become almost as popular as cat videos, Netflix’s latest release, American Murder: Gabby Petito, has turned heads in a way nobody quite expected. The streaming giant, never one to shy away from sensational storytelling, has gone high-tech – or, depending on your perspective, crossed a line – by using generative AI to recreate the voice of Gabby Petito, a 22-year-old social media influencer tragically murdered in August 2021.

But has this avant-garde approach led to a meaningful tribute, or merely morphed a devastating real-life tragedy into a tech sideshow? Let’s delve into the unfolding drama, hear what critics are saying, and weigh up whether Netflix has jumped the shark with its AI voice cloning.

The Case That Shocked Social Media

Gabby Petito’s story captured headlines in 2021. According to the FBI, the young influencer was murdered by her fiancé, Brian Laundrie, during a cross-country road trip. Their relationship, peppered across social media, gave the world a stark and heart-wrenching view of what was happening behind the scenes. Gabby’s disappearance, followed by the discovery of her body, ignited massive public scrutiny and online sleuthing.

So, when Netflix announced it was developing a true crime documentary about Gabby’s case, titled American Murder: Gabby Petito, the internet was all ears. True crime fans tuned in for the premiere on Monday, only to find a surprising disclosure in the opening credits: Petito’s text messages and journal entries would be “brought to life” in what Netflix claims is “her own voice, using voice recreation technology” (Netflix, 2023).

A Techy Twist… or Twisted Tech?

Let’s talk about that twist. Viewers soon discovered that the series literally put Gabby’s words in Gabby’s mouth, using AI-generated audio. But is this a touching homage, or a gruesome gimmick?

• One viewer on X (formerly Twitter) called the move a “deeply unsettling use of AI.” (X user, 2023)
• Another posted: “That is absolutely NOT okay. She’s a murder victim. You are violating her again.” (X user, 2023)

These remarks sum up the general outcry across social platforms. The main concern? That Gabby’s voice was effectively hijacked and resurrected without her explicit consent. Her parents, however, appear to have greenlit the decision, offering Gabby’s journals and personal writings to help shape the script.

Their stance is clear: the production team sees voice recreation as a means to bring Gabby’s point of view into sharper focus. But a lot of viewers remain uneasy, saying they’d prefer archived recordings if authenticity was the goal.

A Tradition of Controversy

Netflix is no stranger to boundary-pushing in its true crime productions. Last year, eagle-eyed viewers noticed American Manhunt: The Jennifer Pan Story featured images that appeared generative or manipulated by AI. In many respects, this is just another addition to a growing trend of digital trickery in modern storytelling.

Outlets like 404 Media have further reported a surge in YouTube channels pumping out “true crime AI slop” – random, possibly fabricated stories produced by generative AI and voice cloning. As these tools become more widespread, it’s increasingly hard to tell fact from fiction, let alone evaluate ethical ramifications.

“It can’t predict what her intonation would have been, and it’s just gross to use it,” one Reddit user wrote in response to the Gabby Petito doc. “At the very least I hope they got consent from her family… I just don’t like the precedent it sets for future documentaries either.” (Redditor, 2023)

This points to a key dilemma: how do we prevent well-meaning storytellers from overstepping moral boundaries with technology designed to replicate or reconstruct the dead? Are we treading on sensitive territory, or is this all simply the new face of docu-drama?

Where Do We Draw the Line After the Netflix AI Voice Controversy

For defenders of American Murder: Gabby Petito, it boils down to parental endorsement. If Gabby’s parents gave the green light, then presumably they believed this approach would honour their daughter’s memory. Some argue that hearing Gabby’s voice – albeit synthesised – might create a deeper emotional connection for viewers and reinforce that she was more than just a headline.

“In all of our docs, we try to go for the source and the people closest to either the victims who are not alive or the people themselves who have experienced this,” explains producer Julia Willoughby Nason. “That’s really where we start in terms of sifting through all the data and information that comes with these huge stories.” (Us Weekly, 2023)

On the other hand, there’s a fair amount of hand-wringing, and for good reason. The true crime genre is already fraught with ethical pitfalls, often seen as commodifying tragic incidents for mainstream entertainment. Voice cloning a victim’s words can come off as invasive, especially for a crime so recent and so visible on social media.

One user captured the discomfort perfectly:
“I understand they had permission from the parents, but that doesn’t make it feel any better,” adding that the AI model sounded, “monotone, lacking in emotion… an insult to her.” (X user, 2023)

And that’s the heart of it. Even with family approval, it’s a sensitive business reanimating someone’s voice once they can no longer speak for themselves. For many, the question becomes: is it a truly fitting tribute, or simply a sensational feature?

Ethics or Entertainment?

Regardless of where you land on the debate, it’s clear that Netflix’s choice marks a new chapter in how technology can (and likely will) be used to re-create missing or murdered people in media. As AI becomes more powerful and more prevalent, it’s not much of a stretch to imagine docu-series about other public figures employing the same approach.

“This world hates women so much,”** another user tweeted,** expressing the view that once again, a woman’s agency in her own narrative has been undermined. (X user, 2023)

Is that a fair assessment, or simply an overstatement borne of the outrage cycle? If Gabby’s story can be told in her own words, with parental involvement, should we not appreciate the effort? Or is the line drawn at artificially resurrecting her voice – a voice that was forcibly taken from her?

So, we’re left to debate a tech-fuelled question: Is it beautiful homage, or a blatant overreach? Given that we’re fast marching into an era where AI blurs the lines of reality, the Netflix approach is just one sign of things to come.

With generative AI firmly planting its flag in creative storytelling, where do you think the moral boundary lies?

You may also like:

• A Chatbot with a Fear of Death?
• Revolutionising Crime-Solving: AI Detectives on the Beat
• Watch the controversial Netflix show by tapping here