Levi's Bashed For Using AI Models To Increase "Diversity" Quota Rather Than Hiring Minorities

Levi's was founded in 1853 in San Francisco, CA and it has since been known as one of the biggest names in denim. Celebrities like Hailey Bieber and Barbie Ferreira have modeled for the brand, which has 8.6 million followers on Instagram. But Levi's has been heavily criticized in the last few days because of its recent choice to use AI (artificial intelligence) models rather than real human beings, especially because it was connected to their efforts to include more diversity in their marketing campaigns. Levi's Bashed for Using AI Models to Increase "Diversity" Quota Rather Than Hiring Minorities Levi's recently announced that they're partnering with Lalaland.ai, an AI company that was founded in 2019 in Amsterdam. This news was announced in a press release on March 22. Levi's shared they were planning to increase "the number and diversity of our models for our products in a sustainable way." Lalaland.ai used advanced artificial intelligence in order to create "hyper-realistic models" of all sizes, age, and skin tone. “While AI will likely never fully replace human models for us, we are excited for the potential capabilities this may afford us for the consumer experience,” said Dr. Amy Gershkoff Bolles, global head of digital and emerging technology strategy at Levi Strauss & Co. “We see fashion and technology as both an art and a science, and we’re thrilled to be partnering with Lalaland.ai, a company with such high-quality technology that can help us continue on our journey for a more diverse and inclusive customer experience.” The new rollout online and in the Levi's app promised to show one model for each product so that customers could "shop with models who look like them," adding that they believe their models "should reflect our consumers." They also announced they are "continuing to diversify our human models in terms of size and body type, age and skin color." But AI technology can help by supplementing models that they weren't able to secure in person. "Diversity, equity and inclusion is a top priority for us at LS&Co., and it’s important to note we do not see AI-generated models as a sole solution. In fact, over the past year, we’ve been focused on ensuring that not only is our work diverse, but those working on the content both in front of and behind the camera are reflective of our broad consumer base — and we’re continuing to do just that," the press release read. However, the announcement wasn't accepted so well. There was much backlash that accused the brand of withholding opportunities from real models who fit the "diversity" quota. Levi's added an editor's note to the press release on March 28, expressing regret at the way the original announcement came off. "Our recent announcement of a partnership with Lalaland.ai did not properly represent certain aspects of the program," the note read. "For that, we take responsibility. We do not see this pilot as a means to advance diversity or as a substitute for the real action that must be taken to deliver on our diversity, equity and inclusion goals and it should not have been portrayed as such." The brand claimed they are "committed to creating a workplace, a business and a marketplace where people from all backgrounds feel confident that they will be seen." They said they believe that companies are stronger when there is more diversity and inclusivity. "We realize there is understandable sensitivity around AI-related technologies, and we want to clarify that this pilot is something we are on track to experiment with later this year in the hopes of strengthening the consumer experience," the letter continued. They concluded by saying that they're "not scaling back" their plans for live photo shoots that feature real models of all different backgrounds. Levi's wants to maintain their "authentic storytelling" in order to connect with their fans. This apology is likely not enough to move the needle and appease the people who were offended by the original announcement, but they were essentially left with no choice than to issue an updated response.