It’s been a crazy week. As a cartoonist, I’ve spent my entire career drawing a distorted world, but the reality I woke up to a few days ago felt even more bizarre than my wildest scribbles. A digital ghost is haunting the very ink and paper of my profession, and what’s even more disturbing is that it’s wearing our face.
This isn’t about robots taking our jobs. This is far more sinister. This is about a new kind of theft, a brazen intellectual property heist that’s happening in plain sight. An unseen, unheard thief, using artificial intelligence to steal the very soul of our art, then having the audacity to sign their name to it.
The target? Political cartooning, a profession already battling for its life in an increasingly contracting media landscape. The weapon? AI, a so-called “creative tool” that’s now being used to mock, mimic, and ultimately, devalue the very craft it claims to enhance.
It started with a message from a colleague. A link to a Facebook page. And a gut punch.
The page, operating under the almost-too-cheesy name of “ToonAmerica,” was a digital hall of mirrors. It featured cartoons by some of the most talented and respected cartoonists in the industry—folks like Pedro Molina and Rick McKee—but something was… off. The lines were too clean, the shadows too perfect. The jokes were all there, the biting political commentary, the satirical jabs, but the images themselves were lifeless, sterile, devoid of the very human hand that gave them their spark.
This wasn’t a cartoonist being inspired by another’s work. This was a direct, digital photocopy. An AI program, I later learned, had been fed a diet of our work, our unique styles, and our very ideas. It was then instructed to regurgitate them, with all the original wit and composition, but without the spirit that makes a cartoon truly powerful. The perpetrator behind the page then, in a final act of utter contempt, signed the AI-generated work as their own.
I’m telling you, it was a moment of true horror. The thief, or maybe just a sad person messing around on their phone, wasn’t creating satire. They were, to put it simply, a digital mynah bird. They were mimicking, regurgitating, and profiting from the years of hard work, the thousands of hours of painstaking detail, and the unique political perspectives that my colleagues and I pour into our art.
My own work was not spared from this digital hijacking. A few days later, a friend sent me an AI-generated version of my cartoon of President Donald Trump. It was my drawing, my font, my joke, but it wasn’t mine. It was a soulless, digital zombie, shambling out of the internet ether to mock the very existence of my profession.
And it’s not just “ToonAmerica.” The internet is now crawling with these AI-generated fakes. They’re popping up on news sites, in social media feeds, and on personal blogs. And the worst part? Most people can’t even tell the difference. They see a cartoon, they laugh (or get angry), and they move on. They don’t see the boring, derivative nature of the art. They don’t see the theft.
This isn’t just an isolated incident, a single person’s pathetic attempt at plagiarism. It’s part of a much larger, global battle being fought on multiple fronts. And it’s not just cartoonists. Artists, authors, and journalists are all under attack.
The Legal and Ethical Battleground: A War on Human Creativity
The legal system, as usual, is playing catch-up. For years, AI developers have been training their models on massive datasets of online content, including copyrighted art, and hiding behind the shield of “fair use.” They argue that what they’re doing is no different from a human artist being inspired by another’s work.
But let’s be real. There’s a huge difference between being inspired by a style and training an AI on millions of copyrighted works to churn out images that directly compete with the original artists. This isn’t inspiration. It’s large-scale commercial exploitation, and it’s happening without permission or compensation.
But there’s a glimmer of hope. The courts are starting to swing in our favor. A U.S. Copyright Office report, a major win for artists, recently concluded that AI developers who use copyrighted works to train models that create “expressive content that competes with” original works are going beyond the scope of fair use.
And the lawsuits are piling up. Major media outlets like The New York Times are suing AI developers like OpenAI and Microsoft for using millions of their articles to train AI models. Artists, authors, and cartoonists are all joining the fight, filing class-action lawsuits against companies like Stability AI and Midjourney. These lawsuits argue, quite simply, that the AI is directly infringing on their intellectual property rights. A ruling back in August 2024 upheld copyright infringement and trademark claims against AI companies, a crucial victory that allows these cases to move forward.
Meanwhile, lawmakers are trying to get ahead of the curve. New bills like the proposed “Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act” and the “NO FAKES Act” are being introduced. These bills aim to force AI developers to be transparent about the copyrighted materials they’re using to train their models. There’s also a growing movement to create new property rights that would protect an individual’s “likeness” from being replicated by AI, a crucial step to protect actors, musicians, and, yes, even piteous, hunchbacked cartoonists.
Our own professional organization, the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists (AAEC), is on the front lines, actively reporting and working to get these infringing accounts taken down. We’ve also banned the use of AI-generated imagery in our membership applications and awards. It’s a loud and clear message: We will not let this technology devalue the artistry and skill of human creators.
The Unstoppable March of Technology vs. The Indomitable Human Spirit
I’m a realist. I know the rise of AI is an unstoppable force. But I also know something that AI will never be able to replicate: the human element.
A political cartoon is not just an image. It’s a unique blend of art, journalism, and personal commentary. It’s a snapshot of a moment in time, seen through the unique lens of a human brain. It requires the ability to read, to synthesize complex political events, to form a position, and to translate that position into a single, visually compelling panel.
A cartoonist has to be a news junkie, a psychologist, a comedian, and a social critic all at once. We spend hours and hours on our work, reading things we don’t want to read, thinking about things that make us angry, and then channeling all that into a single, hand-drawn image. It’s a time-consuming, demanding, and meticulous profession.
AI, for all its sophistication, can only mimic. It can’t feel. It can’t empathize. It can’t truly understand the subtle absurdities of political life or the deeply felt emotions that drive a good cartoon. The “ToonAmerica” fiasco, with its awkward and soulless replications, is proof of this. The images may look like cartoons, but they are devoid of the soul and presence of the person who created them.
And that, ultimately, is a fight that no AI can win. The digital mynah bird can mimic the song, but it will never understand the melody. The struggle for my profession is far from over, but I’m telling you, we are not backing down.
So, what do you think? Is AI the next great artistic tool, or is it a threat to the very soul of human creativity? Let me know in the comments below.
Login with Google