4 ms·
It's not an art piece, it's a writing piece. The illustration is just there for support, not the central focus or even the topic of the article. The author is o
by stronglikedan 2mo ago
It's not an art piece, it's a writing piece. The illustration is just there for support, not the central focus or even the topic of the article. The author is obviously a decent writer, but I don't see how they should be expected to pay an artist for a simple illustration when this article has nothing to do with said illustration. Life isn't black and white, and you'd do yourself a favor by noticing the shades of gray.
- leni536 2mo agoI don't think the illustration adds anything, it could simply be left out. I did enjoy the writing.
- odo1242 2mo agoThey don’t have to pay an artist for the illustration, just use a stock photo (lots of which exist). Or leave it blank (nobody needed an illustration). Having an AI image for filler seems to be in poor taste.
- freehorse 2mo agoThey could just have no "featured image"? Quasi-irrelevant featured images where already bad before AI, AI-generated ones are just 10x worse. Anyway, it is their piece, their website, so they choose how to structure it. I just don't like the plague of obligatory featured images everywhere in general. I can understand a featured image that adds something relevant, or even simply has some artistic value in itself. But both stock images and AI-generated ones add neither.