AI is changing property advertising, but the real question is not whether we use it. It is whether we use it honestly, responsibly and without misleading people.
This illustration was created using AI and demonstrates that we have a choice about what we use.
... or maybe when is AI not acceptable?
A few days ago, I posted a promotional article on social media using a short AI-generated animation. It attracted around 40,000 views and hundreds of visits to our website. Interestingly enough, most people didn't mention the AI at all. Some actively liked it, and one actively criticised it. That made me realise the real question wasn't whether AI is acceptable. It was: why do some uses of AI feel perfectly reasonable while others don't?
If you spend any time on social media, you will have noticed that AI is currently provoking strong reactions. Some people embrace it enthusiastically, whilst others dismiss anything created with AI as somehow alien. The term "AI slop" has started to be used, and more often than not, the debate quickly becomes polarised. AI is either wonderful or terrible.
To be truthful, I don't think either position is particularly helpful. The question is not whether AI is good or bad. The question is whether it is being used honestly.
After all, this is not the first technological revolution that most of us have experienced. During my lifetime, estate agency has moved from local newspaper advertising to online marketing, from fax machines to email, from printed photographs to digital photography, from manual typewriters to computers and smartphones, and from letters to WhatsApp. Every one of these changes caused considerable debate at the time.
Forty years ago, using a word processor instead of a typewriter felt like a major step forward. Mail merge allowed us to personalise hundreds of letters without typing each one individually. Spell check arrived and occasionally produced hilarious mistakes, but very few people today would argue that spell check itself is a bad idea. We simply accept that it needs human judgement. The same applies to AI.
AI is simply another tool, and like every other tool we use, its value depends on how it is used. As with everything, it can be used well or badly.
For example, I have no objection to using AI voice-to-text to help organise ideas or even to produce the first draft of an article like this one. In fact, that's very similar to using a dictation machine and a secretary to type a letter. The responsibility for the finished article still rests with me. I can use AI to proofread the article, and if I disagree with something suggested by AI, I change it or remove it. If the article carries my name, then the opinions and the responsibility contained within it remain mine.
Photography raises similar questions.
Using AI to improve the lighting in a property photograph or to remove a tea towel hanging over an oven door doesn't trouble me at all. Those are temporary distractions which could easily have been dealt with before the photograph was taken. Removing overhead cables, inventing a sea view or making a room appear larger than it really is is a completely different matter. That is not improving the photograph. That is changing reality and is not acceptable.
The same principle applies elsewhere. I don't have a problem with an out-of-hours telephone message explaining that we are closed and asking callers to leave a message. I do have a problem with AI pretending to be a member of staff when the caller believes they are talking to a real person. The difference is not the technology; it is the honesty.
Even the film industry provides an interesting comparison. Modern films rely heavily on CGI, AI-assisted tools or both. Entire scenes can be created without ever existing in front of a camera. Nobody expects a science fiction film to be real. The audience understands that they are watching fiction. A property photograph is entirely different. A buyer expects it to represent a real property. The standard is therefore different, and I wouldn't dream of using a photograph which misled anyone into believing that a property was something it wasn't.
A further thought on this is that technology has a habit of creeping into our lives gradually and in a way that we barely notice. A few years ago, social media was full of novelty filters that made people look ridiculous. They were amusing because they were new. Today, they are largely ignored. Mobile phones, spell check, email, WhatsApp and digital photography all followed a similar pattern. They were once controversial; now they are simply a part of everyday life. I think AI will eventually become another accepted tool.
I certainly don't know what the future holds. Fifteen years ago, I don't think many people would have predicted how dominant property portals would become. Equally, I don't think we can assume that they will always be the main way in which people search for property. One day, buyers may simply ask an AI assistant, "I'm looking for a two-bedroom apartment with open views, within my budget and close to local amenities. Which three properties suit me best and why?" Will that happen? I don't know. There are signs that this could well be the future, but of course, nobody really knows for sure.
What my experience has taught me is that becoming too attached to today's technology is usually a mistake. Newspapers once dominated property advertising, then websites arrived, then the property portals. Something else will almost certainly come next. Having said that, I think if you know that you are talking to AI, that is one thing, but to have AI imitating me or any other member of the team in order to mislead a potential customer is something I would find totally unacceptable.
In summary, for me, the real question is not whether we should use AI. It is a matter of being sure that we use it honestly, in a way that is responsible and worthy of the trust people place in us. The technology will change, but the principles should not.
