ON
← Back to feed
Fact check: Spotting AI-generated 'historical' images
Germany🏛️ Politicsyesterday

Fact check: Spotting AI-generated 'historical' images

Archaeologists in Italy's Pompeii have used AI for the first time to reconstruct an image of a victim of the 79 C.E. volcanic eruption. As AI becomes more accessible, it is increasingly used to generate 'historical' images and videos, often without expert consultation. Media scholar Roland Meyer warns that while AI can fill perceived gaps in history, it risks creating misleading content that reflects modern biases rather than accurate historical records. Experts advise checking if a video could realistically exist and looking for visual clues, such as unnatural movement or modern elements, to identify AI-generated content. One example cited involves an AI-generated video based on the famous 1945 Iwo Jima flag-raising photograph, which lacks authentic historical footage.

Archaeologists in Italy’s ancient city of Pompeii have employed artificial intelligence for the first time to reconstruct an image of a victim of the volcanic eruption that destroyed the region in 79 C.E. This marks a new phase in the use of AI to recreate historical moments, sparking debate among scholars about the implications of such technology in shaping public perception of the past. Experts caution that AI-generated “historical” images and videos are becoming increasingly common, often created without input from historians or archaeologists. Roland Meyer, a media scholar at the University of Zurich, argues that while AI allows for the recombination of historical imagery, it risks producing misleading representations of the past. He described the process as offering a “deceptive promise,” suggesting that AI-generated images reflect contemporary biases rather than accurate historical records. AI systems frequently produce errors, sometimes generating entirely fabricated content, referred to as “hallucinations.” These inaccuracies complicate efforts to distinguish real historical footage from AI-generated material. Historian and AI specialist Sebastian Kubon noted that many viral AI-generated “historical” videos blur the line between fact and fiction. A simple question, “Could this video have actually existed?”, often helps identify such content. For instance, a video purporting to depict Pompeii was easily dismissed due to its implausible nature, including movement resembling zombies and features inconsistent with ancient Roman aesthetics. Visual clues and careful examination of sources are essential in identifying AI-generated content. In one example, a video featuring U.S. soldiers holding the American flag showed unnatural movements and included a watermark indicating it was created using Veo, a generative AI tool. The video was based on a well-known 1945 photograph of soldiers raising the flag on Iwo Jima, yet no authentic footage of that exact moment exists. Experts emphasize the need to scrutinize both the content and context of such materials, questioning their origins, creators, and intended purposes. Critics argue that AI-generated images often replicate existing stereotypes and clichés about the past, reflecting current societal views rather than providing genuine insights into history. Jürgen Zimmerer, a professor of African history at the University of Hamburg, highlighted that visual sources have long been contentious, noting that authoritarian regimes historically manipulated images for propaganda. However, the widespread availability of AI tools has amplified the potential for misinformation on an unprecedented scale. Despite concerns, the integration of AI into historical research offers opportunities for innovation. Archaeologists and historians are exploring ways to use AI responsibly, ensuring that reconstructions are transparent and accompanied by clear explanations of their limitations. As the technology evolves, so must the standards for verifying and interpreting historical content. Scholars stress the importance of maintaining rigorous analytical practices to prevent the spread of misleading information. Efforts are underway to educate the public on recognizing AI-generated content through critical thinking and source evaluation. Educational initiatives aim to equip individuals with the skills needed to discern credible historical accounts from fabricated ones. As AI continues to influence how history is presented and understood, the role of experts in guiding public discourse becomes increasingly vital. Researchers are working to develop frameworks that balance technological advancement with ethical considerations, ensuring that the past is neither distorted nor misrepresented.

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Go to the primary sources (2)

The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.

1 reports

Deutsche Welle (English) logoDeutsche Welle (English)State / PublicCenterFactual 60Objective 85yesterday
Fact check: Spotting AI-generated 'historical' images

Archaeologists in Italy's Pompeii have used AI for the first time to reconstruct an image of a victim of the 79 C.E. volcanic eruption. As AI becomes more accessible, it is increasingly used to generate 'historical' images and videos, often without expert consultation. Media scholar Roland Meyer warns that while AI can fill perceived gaps in history, it risks creating misleading content that reflects modern biases rather than accurate historical records. Experts advise checking if a video could realistically exist and looking for visual clues, such as unnatural movement or modern elements, to identify AI-generated content. One example cited involves an AI-generated video based on the famous 1945 Iwo Jima flag-raising photograph, which lacks authentic historical footage.

Bias read (Center): The article discusses the use of AI in generating historical imagery and the implications for accuracy and bias. While it highlights concerns raised by scholars about potential misrepresentation, it does not take a stance on the issue itself, presenting both the technological advancements and the ca

Why factuality (60): The article discusses AI-generated historical images and does not directly reference the Iwo Jima photograph. It provides general information about AI's role in generating historical imagery, which is relevant but not specific to the primary source document. The article lacks direct connection to th

Why objectivity (85): The tone remains informative and balanced, discussing both the capabilities and potential pitfalls of AI-generated content. There is no overt bias or emotional language, maintaining an objective stance throughout.

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories