As artificial intelligence continues to reshape creative fields, a recent controversy in North Dublin has sparked a broader conversation about the place of AI-generated imagery in public life. Fingal County Council’s decision to use an AI-created image to promote the launch of a new food market at Swords Castle has drawn criticism from local artists and residents, while also highlighting the practical challenges faced by organizations under tight deadlines[1][2][3].
The council’s rationale was straightforward: with the market being brand new and no existing photographs available, time constraints led staff to opt for an AI-generated image as a temporary placeholder. Internal communications reveal that the team intended to replace the AI image with real photos after the market’s debut, aiming to showcase the authentic vibrancy of the event. Yet, the move was not universally accepted. Critics argued that using AI in a public arts context risks undermining the value of local creative talent—photographers, illustrators, and visual artists who could have brought a unique, community-driven perspective to the campaign[2][3].
The backlash underscores a tension between efficiency and authenticity. On one hand, AI presents a quick and cost-effective solution for organizations pressed for time or resources. On the other, it raises questions about the role of councils in supporting and promoting local culture. As one community member pointed out, public bodies have a responsibility to nurture and showcase the creative spirit that thrives within their own neighborhoods[2].
Fingal County Council acknowledged the concerns, stating that the feedback was being taken seriously and that future campaigns would aim for a more creative, community-focused approach once actual event photography became available. However, the incident also revealed a broader uncertainty within the organization about the rules and expectations surrounding the use of AI in public communications. One official questioned whether there was any obligation to hire a professional designer or any policy prohibiting AI-generated content, suggesting that guidelines in this area remain unclear[2][3].
This case mirrors challenges faced by many organizations as they navigate the rapid evolution of digital tools. Just as some councils have experimented with AI chatbots to improve customer service—such as Fingal’s Virtual Covid-19 Assistant—so too are they now testing the waters with generative AI for visual content[3]. The episode at Swords Castle serves as a microcosm of a larger debate: how can public institutions harness the benefits of new technology while staying true to their mission of supporting local culture and talent?
Ultimately, the controversy highlights the need for clear policies and open dialogue about the use of AI in public campaigns. As technology continues to advance, councils and other public bodies will need to balance innovation with a commitment to the communities they serve.
