New research from Otis College of Art and Design, developed with Westwood Economics and Planning Consultants, finds California’s recent creative industry contraction does not match a pattern of worker displacement by generative Artificial Intelligence. The study examines the state’s film, fashion, gaming, media, advertising, arts and architecture sectors and concludes that job losses are better explained by cost-driven displacement of lower-paying roles and broader structural changes that have hit California especially hard.
Between 2022 and 2025, California’s creative economy lost 14 percent of its jobs, or 114,000 roles. According to the report, those losses were concentrated in film, television and sound, which saw a nearly 30 percent decline in jobs in that time period, and in traditional media, with a nearly 34 percent decline. The report says the occupations most exposed to Artificial Intelligence in the state’s creative economy, including writers, software developers and artists, have been growing in number rather than shrinking, and job postings for those roles have also increased.
The findings point instead to a mix of high living costs pushing lower-paid workers out of California and budget cuts following Hollywood’s Peak TV era. Interviews with workers indicate that generative Artificial Intelligence is currently being used for defined tasks where outputs can be checked and time savings are clear, rather than for replacing entire roles. The report says no interviewee described Artificial Intelligence as taking over a complete job or workflow.
Postproduction work in film and television illustrates the pattern. Artificial Intelligence can handle tasks such as rotoscoping or wire removal, but it still struggles with more creative work, and reviewing machine-generated output often creates added labor for people. One VFX company owner described a major television production where “They have 15 artists that are sitting at workstations fixing the AI… When you multiply the rate of the artists by 15 and put that against the cost of the work you’re doing, it negates any savings that AI is giving you.”
The research also finds that workers themselves have considerable influence over how much generative Artificial Intelligence is used, because they are often the ones applying the tools directly. Interviewees expressed ethical concerns, worries about being seen as expendable, and anxiety over rising productivity demands and pressure to accept lower-quality output. The authors recommend that organizations avoid rushing deployment, reduce stigma around using Artificial Intelligence, and adopt policies such as firing freezes so workers can experiment more openly and build trust in the technology.
