Newsflash: AI Models Are Not En Vogue. They're Flat-Out Unsustainable
What do Vogue, AI, Anne Hathaway, and drama all have in common? (And, no, we're not talking about "The Devil Wears Prada 2.") The August 2025 issue of the fashion bible, which features Hathaway on the cover, contains a Guess ad that features an AI model, and while Guess may have paid good money for the ad, we have an issue with it. Publications like Vogue need to exist on a higher moral ground and put their readers above ads and AI models that can obliterate their self-worth.
When X account PopCrave posted the evidence, we rolled our eyes, and readers pounced on the news. One commenter wrote, "This is war on art, fashion, and culture." Sadly, this isn't the first time the magazine, or its competitors, have allowed AI onto its pages. For example, experts pointed to strange things about Lauren Sánchez's wedding photos that didn't add up when Vogue printed snaps from her big day that seemingly featured AI manipulation. With an overwhelming amount of money at her disposal, there was no reason for AI to be involved, and Vogue, as a cornerstone of pop culture, shouldn't stoop so low as to promote false ideals for people to look up to.
Vogue's August issue has begun to use "AI models" instead of human models for some of their photoshoots.
— Pop Crave (@PopCrave) July 24, 2025
That's not even to mention AI's environmental impact. Many people don't realize how many natural resources get mined for AI use or the vast amounts of energy required to run the technology, making it reliant on fossil fuels. AI is modestly regulated (if you can even say that) and continues to steamroll ahead without many checks on it. With Vogue's AI scandal specifically, we should be concerned — to put it mildly — about how using AI models can skew beauty standards, strangle creativity, make us question authenticity, and even decimate creative jobs.
AI models skew beauty standards more than the fashion industry already does
It seems like just yesterday that magazine editors were grappling with whether or not photoshopping was ethical, but that seems like child's play now. AI has the power to exacerbate stereotypes of what is seen as beautiful and create unhealthy, unrealistic standards. If technology is pulling from past magazine content (OpenAI partnered with Vogue's parent company, Conde Nast, for an unreported sum to use its content in teaching its AI), it's presumably going to cobble together the "best" parts of models into one computer-generated model. This isn't even to touch on the racial biases seen in the modeling world, which could be recreated in the AI models.
But who's training AI to know what's beautiful? Is it the heads of Seraphinne Vallora, the marketing agency in charge of creating the Guess models that appeared in Vogue? (The firm's work has also appeared in Elle, Harper's Bazaar, WSJ, and Grazia, and the company's Instagram page shows AI models in ads for Saint Laurent and Dolce & Gabbana.) Seraphinne Vallora's AI-generated models mostly have blue eyes, long hair, tan skin, and unachievable body types. One of the company's co-founders, Valentina Gonzalez, told the BBC that the firm's featured diverse AI models on its Instagram, but "we don't get any traction or likes" for them. Have some moral integrity. It doesn't need to be all about likes; consider the 15-year-old girl scrolling through, looking for something that makes her feel seen and worthy. We already have long-standing issues with the fashion industry for singularly promoting one type of beauty, and we don't need technology reinforcing it.
We celebrate those who are unconventionally attractive (it can even pay off!) and are constantly urging people to stop comparing themselves to unrealistic beauty standards, but how do we urge that in an environment where images of the "ideal" woman being splashed in front of us are literally unreal? This isn't a sustainable way to approach everyday people, and frankly, it's not cute.
Yes, models should be worried about their job security, too
Another issue that affects creative industries broadly is the loss of jobs to AI. For the Guess ad featured in Vogue, it wasn't just a model that missed out on a lucrative payday — behind each photo is a full team, including a photographer, stylist, hairstylist, makeup artist, and more. These people are unnecessary in an AI modeling world, but each brings touches that can't be replicated by machines collecting dust in some obnoxiously wasteful data center.
So, why is fashion, once seen as an industry for creatives, getting behind AI? The bottom line, which is a poor excuse for an industry drowning in money. As Seraphinne Vallora's website states, using AI models means "no more expensive travel or complicated arrangements." We'd love to hear from models like Gigi Hadid, whose first gig was for Guess, to see what they have to say about AI taking their jobs. Beyond models speaking out, consumers need to put their dollars where their values lie and push back on companies that stifle creativity and perpetuate stereotypes. Hollywood has put up a fight against AI, and fashion needs to do the same. Then, the industry can get to work on diversifying its beauty standards because AI isn't fashion's only problem.
Ultimately, we're not saying we need to be afraid of AI — it's often best to confront, understand, and work with what frightens us — but we shouldn't let it steamroll ahead without any legal guidelines and flatten creative industries in the process. Right now is when we need to stand up for individuality in every aspect, from the way we create to the way we look.