A Year of Friction: Art, Algorithms, and the Quiet Battle for Meaning

The last year did not arrive with a singular rupture or headline-grabbing collapse. There was no dramatic moment that clearly announced, This is when everything changed. Instead, it unfolded as a slow constriction, a tightening of cultural space that many felt before they could name it. The arts continued to circulate, to be produced, shared, and applauded. Yet beneath that surface continuity, the conditions under which art existed were being quietly rewritten.

What defined the year was not overt repression but a subtler form of control: the normalization of constraint. Platforms refined their rules. Algorithms refined their preferences. Economic pressures refined creative ambition. The result was an environment where art was increasingly encouraged to be safe, streamlined, and agreeable. Risk was not banned; it was disincentivised. Ambiguity was tolerated only so long as it did not interfere with scale.

Censorship in this landscape rarely looked like censorship. It arrived disguised as moderation, as brand safety, as community protection. Posts were not deleted so much as buried. Accounts were not banned so much as rendered invisible. The language of harm prevention and platform responsibility masked a more troubling reality: a narrowing of what could be seen, shared, and sustained.

Artists learned to adapt. Many did so unconsciously. Certain words were avoided. Certain themes softened. Inevitable political, erotic, or philosophical tensions were flattened into safer abstractions. This was not capitulation so much as survival. When livelihoods depend on reach, and reach depends on compliance, however loosely defined, self-censorship becomes structural.

What emerged was a culture of preemptive restraint. I’m not sure what I would like to say. But how will this be interpreted by a system that does not understand context, irony, or intent? The machine listener replaced the human one, and art adjusted accordingly.

Running parallel to this was the rapid maturation of artificial intelligence. Over the past year, AI crossed a psychological threshold. It stopped being something people experimented with and started being something they relied on. It wrote marketing copy, generated illustrations, summarized essays, produced music beds, and populated feeds with an endless stream of “good enough” output.

This did not eliminate creativity. But it changed the terrain on which creativity operates.

When machines can produce infinite content at minimal cost, expression loses its scarcity. And when expression loses scarcity, attention becomes the only remaining currency. In such an environment, work that is difficult, slow, or demanding becomes harder to justify both economically and algorithmically.

AI revealed an uncomfortable truth about digital culture: much of what we had been calling creativity was already procedural. Already formula-driven. Already optimized for discoverability rather than depth. In that sense, AI did not hollow out culture—it exposed the hollowness that was already there.

Yet the true danger is not automation alone. It is automation paired with visibility control. When AI generates content and platform algorithms determine what is surfaced, culture risks becoming a closed loop, self-reinforcing, frictionless, and resistant to disruption. The system favors what resembles what already works. Originality becomes statistical noise.

In this context, censorship need not be ideological. It can be purely technical. Art that confuses classifiers, resists easy labeling, or provokes uneven reactions is quietly sidelined. Not because it is forbidden, but because it is inconvenient.

This is why the coming year matters.

2026 will not be about debating whether AI is “good” or “bad.” That argument is already obsolete. AI is here, embedded in workflows, economies, and expectations. The real question is whether human creativity will be allowed to retain its defining qualities: contradiction, excess, failure, slowness, and doubt.

We are approaching a cultural fork. One path leads toward an endlessly refreshed surface, competent, inoffensive, and forgettable. A culture that feels busy but hollow, where expression exists primarily to fill space and capture micro-moments of attention. The other path is narrower and less visible. It privileges depth over reach, meaning over metrics, and substance over speed.

Choosing the latter will require intention. From creators, it will demand resistance to optimization as a default mindset. A willingness to make work that may not travel well, may not trend, may not be immediately legible. Work that assumes an intelligent reader, listener, or viewer still exists.

From institutions and platforms that take any responsibility at all, it will require acknowledging that safety without freedom is not neutrality. That moderation without transparency becomes power. That protecting users from harm should not mean insulating them from complexity.

And from audiences, it will require something increasingly rare: attention. To read slowly. To sit with discomfort. To seek out work that does not arrive pre-approved by an algorithm. In a culture of infinite content, choosing what not to consume may be as important as choosing what to support.

The last year taught us that censorship no longer needs to be silence, it merely needs to be smooth. And that AI does not threaten creativity by replacing it, but by surrounding it with so much synthetic approximation that the real thing becomes harder to find.

In 2026, art will not disappear. But it may become easier than ever to ignore. The challenge ahead is not preservation, but discernment: deciding which kinds of expression we want to carry forward and which we are willing to let quietly fade into the feed.

By Jake James Beach

Founder of The Deep Dive Society

If you’ve enjoyed this exploration, we’d love to welcome you back to the Deep Dive Society. Subscribe to our newsletter and follow us on social media to stay connected, join the conversation, and help build a community dedicated to curiosity, reflection, and the art of looking deeper. Together, we can shape a society committed to the Deep Dive mission.