The Perfect Twin Paradox: H&M's digital twin models and the hidden cost of innovation
Ethical AI or Closing Doors? How Digital Twins Reshape Fashion's Entry Points
H&M's recent introduction of digital twins for fashion models represents an intriguing case study in ethical AI implementation. The fast fashion giant has taken a refreshingly transparent approach: creating contractual relationships with models who maintain significant control over their digital likenesses, positioning this technology as an enhancement rather than a threat to traditional modeling.
On the surface, this approach deserves recognition. It stands in stark contrast to cases like OpenAI's disputed voice simulation that eerily resembled Scarlett Johansson's—resulting in legal action. H&M's consensual, collaborative process appears to establish a model of responsible AI adoption.
The overlooked structural impact
However, this development reveals a more complex dynamic beneath the surface—one that affects the thousands of aspiring models who never reach star status. The fashion modeling industry already operates within an extreme hierarchy, where:
- Countless young people (predominantly women) struggle to earn a living wage
- Breaking into the industry requires persistent physical presence at castings
- Opportunity is distributed unevenly and often unpredictably
Digital twins fundamentally alter this ecosystem. When brands can access "optimal" digital versions of established models at any moment, they eliminate one of the few structural inefficiencies that historically created opportunity: the logistical challenges of fashion shoots.
Closing door for new talent
Fashion shoots are notoriously chaotic—constrained by time pressure, logistical complexities, and availability issues. These very constraints sometimes forced brands to cast new faces, creating entry points for emerging talent. Digital twins effectively remove these friction points.
This isn't about protecting industry inefficiency for its own sake. The fashion world is well-documented for its problematic working conditions. However, portraying AI as a solution overlooks how it may further concentrate opportunity among an even smaller elite.
The aspiring models walking through fashion capitals with portfolios in hand, seeking their break at castings, face a narrowing path. Their dream—however challenging or imperfect—becomes incrementally less accessible when digital replicas of established models become the path of least resistance for brands under pressure.
The question isn't whether H&M's approach is better than unauthorized digital replication—it clearly is. The more nuanced consideration is how even consensual, transparent AI implementation can inadvertently reinforce existing power structures and further limit mobility within creative industries.
It's not surprising to me, that I see primarily men who are not engaged in the daily lives of this industry, commanding H&M on their decision without any consideration for what happens to younger women.