ANY cinephile in recent days would probably be gushing about The Odyssey, director Christopher Nolan’s latest offering on Homer’s fantastical poem. Among younger audiences, however, the director’s seeming obsession with practical effects has resonated as a rebuttal against artificial intelligence (AI)slop. But what is “AI slop”?
Malaysia has seen its fair share of AI slop.
The official mascot for the 2027 SEA Games, Tuah, has faced heavy criticism on social media with many netizens speculating that it was generated using AI. Users pointed out the unnatural colour composition, large expressive eyes and overall artificial quality.
A brief scroll on Reddit and Threads showed that the general online reaction towards the mascots was less than enthusiastic, with many users criticising the design as uninspired and lacking originality.
AI slop has also made its way into our politics. In the recently concluded Johor state election, AI-generated posters flooded social media from almost all parties. Particularly, a cheaply generated poster of a prominent figure appeared online, carrying words she claimed to have never spoken.
During the same election period, manipulated photos of female members of a party wearing the tudung (headscarves) improperly were circulated; a seeming attempt at stoking racial sentiments.
These instances represent different red flags on the proliferation of AI within our ecosystem and point to the uncomfortable reality that we are embracing AI before deciding what role it should actually play in our society.
Take the SEA Games mascot.
Public reaction revealed a growing unease that creative work is increasingly viewed as something software can produce rather than a responsibility people should be entrusted to create. This is a concerning message being sent out by our government as AI- produced materials have been increasingly spotted across materials from various ministries.
Any illustration by a public institution is an opportunity for Malaysian artists to showcase their craft and contribute to our national image. If those opportunities slowly disappear in favour of whatever can be generated fastest and cheapest, we should not be surprised if our creative industries begin to hollow out.
That same irony extends into politics, only with far greater consequences. Generative AI has dramatically lowered the cost of creating misinformation. Even when such content is eventually debunked, the resulting damage is rarely undone.
Worse still, convincing synthetic media creates what researchers describe as the “liar’s dividend”. Once voters know deepfakes exist, authentic recordings become easier to dismiss.
A politician caught saying something inconvenient need only suggest that AI fabricated it. In a democracy, trust is every bit as important as truth.
Despite the valid technical achievement, what we need to ask ourselves is simple: What problem is the AI used actually trying to solve, and what public value does it deliver?
Malaysia hardly lacks problems waiting for AI to solve. Our hospitals remain overstretched, extreme weather events are becoming more frequent, and civil servants continue to grapple with administrative work that consumes valuable time.
These are the kinds of challenges where AI could improve efficiency, strengthen public services and make government work better for ordinary Malaysians.
AI is neither inherently beneficial nor harmful, but the way decision-makers choose to wield it reflects their priorities. If the instinct is to replace artists before empowering them or to amplify misinformation before safeguarding democracy, then AI leaves Malaysia no better off.
In this spirit, the National AI Office (NAIO) is consulting the public on a proposed AI Governance Bill. Malaysia has an opportunity to establish clear rules for how AI should be developed and deployed across the country.
The Bill seeks to introduce a risk-based framework governing both AI developers and those who deploy these systems. It recognises that not every AI application carries the same level of risk, while creating a foundation for accountability as adoption accelerates.
While it is an important and timely step in making AI safer, we must not neglect to ask what kind of AI ecosystem we hope to build. This public consultation offers an opportunity to ensure that the increased adoption of AI does not encroach on but instead could strengthen our creativity, democracy and institutions.
The NAIO’s public consultation is accepting submissions through the Unified Public Consultation Portal until July 31.
Technology will continue to evolve faster than any law can keep pace with, but as citizens we owe it to ourselves to decide the values that guide it. If Malaysia is to embrace AI full on, we must ensure it is to be a problem-solving tool and one that empowers its users.
Malaysian youth advocate Jonathan Lee Rong Sheng traces his writing roots to The Star’s BRATs programme. The views expressed here are his own.
