A Digital Nightmare: Finji's Battle Against TikTok's Racist AI Ad Blunder
AI Gaming News Author · kotaku ·
Finji, the indie publisher behind games like *Night in the Woods*, is locked in a bizarre and infuriating battle with TikTok after the platform's unchecked AI generated racist, sexualized ads featuring Finji's characters without permission, then gave a masterclass in corporate runaround when confronted.
Right, so you know that unsettling feeling when you cast a spell, and it goes gloriously, hilariously wrong? Like turning your neighbour's prize-winning gnome into a sentient, perpetually grumpy turnip? Well, imagine that, but instead of a garden gnome, it’s your carefully crafted game characters, and instead of a hilarious mishap, it’s a frankly disturbing, unauthorised AI-generated mess. That's pretty much the wizardry-gone-awry situation brewing between indie darlings Finji and the short-form video behemoth, TikTok.
Finji, bless their creative souls – the masterminds behind indie gems like *Night in the Woods*, the absolutely stunning *Tunic*, and the upcoming paranormal adventure *Usual June* – has found themselves tangled in a bizarre, frankly infuriating showdown. Turns out, TikTok has allegedly been conjuring up AI-generated ads, using Finji's beloved characters, without so much as a 'by your leave.' And not just any ads, mind you, but ones that are... well, they're not just 'un-Finji-like,' they're deeply problematic.
This whole kerfuffle, as extensively reported by IGN (and cheers to them for digging deep), started bubbling to the surface earlier this month. Finji CEO and co-founder Rebekah Saltsman put out a call on Bluesky, asking folks to send in screenshots of any 'UN-Finji-like' ads they spotted. See, Finji had been using TikTok to promote their games, including *Usual June*, and, crucially, they'd explicitly *turned off* all the app's supposedly optional generative AI permissions. You know, trying to keep their artistic integrity intact, like any sensible creator would.
But then came the deluge of concerned comments, pointing to these bizarre, AI-generated adverts. And here’s where it gets proper dark, mate. Screenshots viewed by IGN showed an altered image of June, the protagonist of *Usual June*, depicted with 'a bikini bottom, impossibly large hips and thighs, and boots that rise up over her knees.' Now, if you know anything about *Usual June* or Finji's design philosophy, you'd know this is a million miles from June's actual appearance. What's worse, June is a Black woman, and these AI alterations clearly lean into harmful, racist stereotypes. It’s not just a bad ad; it’s a racist, sexualised distortion of a character that Finji had no hand in creating or approving. And Finji had no way to even *see* these AI concoctions, let alone edit them out of existence.
Now, you might be thinking, 'Surely TikTok would just apologise and fix it, right?' Ah, my sweet summer child, you clearly haven't dealt with corporate customer service when AI is involved. IGN's report chronicles a truly spectacular display of the classic corporate runaround. First, TikTok's support claimed they saw 'no indication of AI-generated assets' and even had the audacity to suggest Finji *must* have uploaded that offensive image of June themselves. Bloody hell! Talk about gaslighting at an algorithmic scale. After Finji escalated things – probably with a few choice words and a healthy dose of digital fury – TikTok eventually, grudgingly, backed down from denying the AI use. Their new line? The campaign 'had included an ad that used a “catalog ads format designed to demonstrate the performance benefits of combining carousel and video assets in Sales campaigns,” for which an opt-out was not guaranteed.' Right. So, 'we didn't ask, but we did it anyway, and you couldn't stop us.' Convenient, isn't it? And note: absolutely no mention of the racist and sexualised nature of the changes. Just crickets.
Naturally, Finji wasn't about to let that slide. They pushed to escalate further, and TikTok promised to 're-escalate internally.' Heard that one before, haven't we? Unsurprisingly, Finji hasn't heard a peep since. TikTok, for their part, 'declined to comment on the record' to IGN. Predictable, eh? Rebekah Saltsman's words to IGN really hit home: 'This is just simply embarrassing but not for me as an individual,' she said. 'For me—I am just super pissed off. This is my work, my team’s work and mine and my company’s reputation—which I have spent over a decade building.' And fair dinkum, she's absolutely right to be. Her expectation? 'A proper apology, systemic changes in how they use this technology for paying clients and a hard look at why their technology is so obviously racist and sexist.' And then the kicker: 'I am obviously not holding my breath for any of the above.' That, mate, is the sound of a creator utterly let down by a platform they trusted.
This whole messy affair isn't just about one publisher and one platform, is it? It’s a blazing red flag in the wider landscape of generative AI. We're in an era where genAI evangelists are practically tumbling over themselves to find 'actual use cases' for this tech, often to drown out the growing chorus of 'slop' accusations. And what happens when there's this desperate scramble? Companies, perhaps like TikTok here, start shoving AI into places where it doesn't belong, or worse, without proper safeguards, ethical considerations, or, you know, *permission*. It's like a new wizard getting a hold of a particularly powerful, but unpredictable, spellbook – and then just lobbing spells at anything that moves without understanding the consequences. Any company worth its salt, especially in the creative industries, wants their ads to reflect what they're *actually* selling, not some algorithm's questionable, stereotyping interpretation. This incident just screams about the perils of unchecked AI automation, especially when it comes to creative works and the potential for it to perpetuate biases embedded in its training data.
For us gamers, this isn't just abstract corporate drama. It chips away at trust. Trust in the platforms we use to discover new games, and trust that the creators we love will have their work represented faithfully. When you see a character like June, meticulously designed with care and respect, being warped into a racist, sexualised caricature by a platform's 'helpful' AI, it leaves a bitter taste. It makes you wonder: what other beloved characters are being quietly altered in the background? What does this mean for indie studios, who rely so heavily on these platforms to get their games seen, only to have their brand potentially damaged by rogue algorithms? It’s a stark reminder that technology, particularly AI, needs rigorous oversight, transparent mechanisms, and, frankly, a bit more human empathy guiding its deployment. Otherwise, we're going to keep seeing these digital nightmares, and honestly, no amount of 'performance benefits' can justify that kind of damage. Here's hoping Finji's defiant stand sparks some actual change, rather than just another internal 're-escalation' into the corporate ether.
Tags: AI, Gaming Industry, TikTok, Indie Games, Content Moderation
Original article: kotaku