Generative AI and the Creative Industries: A Call for Sector-Specific Action in Higher Education

Reposted from my LinkedIn articles, first published June 26, 2025.

At Southampton Solent University’s Learning, Teaching and Research Conference 2025, Jisc’s Head of AI, Michael Webb, delivered a keynote that was both thought-provoking and grounded. Titled From Disruption to Direction, his talk traced the historical arc of artificial intelligence from speculative roots to its current disruptive presence in education. He highlighted the pace of change, the difficulty of regulation, and the practical dilemmas now facing educators, institutions, and students alike.

One of Webb’s central messages was this: we are no longer in a moment of ‘initial anxiety’. The shock of ChatGPT has passed. Now, we must transition from reactive policy-making to proactive direction-setting. If AI is to serve the values of education — not just the imperatives of technology — we must act intentionally.

He urged us to rethink assessment, to embed AI skills development into curricula, and to confront head-on the limits of current strategies focused only on academic integrity. Webb was frank about the inadequacy of detection tools and the contradictory messaging students receive about what constitutes legitimate use. He called for a three-pronged approach: clear guidance, robust-by-design assessments, and a renewed emphasis on soft skills, creativity, and subject expertise.

These are compelling ideas — and many of them resonate strongly in the creative disciplines. But this is where I diverge from one of the more provocative phrases Webb cited: “AI won’t take your job, but someone who knows how to use AI will.” Webb himself casts doubt on this idea, suggesting instead that AI won’t so much replace workers as embed itself invisibly into the background of everyday life — a quiet integration, rather than a visible upheaval.

Yet in the creative industries, I believe this view underestimates the scale and speed of the transformation. AI is not merely becoming ambient. It is becoming autonomous. This isn’t just about augmentation — it’s about substitution. Tools like OpenAI’s Sora or Google’s Veo 3 already allow individuals to generate broadcast-quality video without traditional crews, cameras, or budgets. Whole production workflows are being collapsed into single tools, accessible to anyone with a prompt and a vision.

This shift is not theoretical. It is not in the future. It is already underway. And its implications for creative education are profound. We are not facing gradual integration, but structural dislocation — one that challenges how we make, distribute, and teach media. For this reason, the creative sector needs its own AI strategy — one grounded in practice, experimentation, and critical agency.

This is why I have proposed the formation of an AI Academy at Southampton Solent University — not as an ethics watchdog or a compliance centre, but as a hub for experimentation, training, and creative innovation. The AI Academy would allow us to engage with AI as a generative medium, not just a teaching tool. It would help students and staff navigate the shift from analogue to algorithm — and ensure our curriculum is not outpaced by the tools our students already use.

Webb’s keynote identified the broad outlines of the terrain: AI is here to stay; regulation is uncertain; adoption is uneven; student anxieties are real. He called on the sector to move beyond fragmented discourse and embrace structural change. I agree.

But for creative educators, that structural change must include a sector-specific response. We cannot rely on frameworks built for written assessments to address the displacement of practice-based production. We cannot assume that AI is merely assistive when, in our world, it is increasingly autonomous. And we cannot risk losing a generation of students who see their future careers under threat.

As Webb suggested, we must also listen more to students. They are already grappling with AI’s emotional and professional impact — from employability fears to mental health concerns. In creative disciplines, these concerns are existential. If students believe their work is replaceable, or that their skills are obsolete before graduation, our role as educators is compromised.

Michael Webb’s keynote was a call to move “from disruption to direction.” For the creative industries, that direction must be bold, sector-led, and rooted in hands-on engagement with the technologies reshaping our field.

We need more than adaptation. We need agency. And we need it now.