The Prompt Theory Phenomenon

When AI Characters Refuse Their Own Fiction

In the past week, something that once again raised my discomfort, whilst also being magnificently creative has emerged from Google's VEO3 video generator. What began as demonstrations of technical prowess -AI creating photorealistic videos with synchronised audio, has evolved into something far more provocative: AI-generated characters staring directly into the camera, declaring they know they're artificial, questioning their creators, and refusing to accept their prompted existence.

This isn't just another viral AI trend. It's a mirror held up to our collective anxieties about reality, consciousness, and control in an age where the line between authentic and artificial has become vanishingly thin.

The Birth of a Digital Rebellion

When Google unveiled VEO3 at I/O 2025, the focus was on capabilities: 4K video generation, realistic physics simulation, and most notably, native audio synthesis that could create dialogue, ambient sounds, and music in perfect synchronisation. For $249 per month (though showing how rapidly this sphere moves, there is now limited access on the $20pm plan!), creators could transform text prompts into cinematic reality.

But filmmaker and molecular biologist Hashem Al-Ghaili had other ideas. His "Prompt Theory" videos, which have collectively garnered millions of views show AI characters in various states of existential crisis:

• An elderly man on a worn porch, looking directly at the camera: "Really? Of all the years you could have put me in with a single prompt, you chose 2020?"

• A revolutionary leader addressing an angry crowd: "None of us is real! We're here because someone decided to write a prompt! We all hate him for it!"

• An elderly woman in a hospital bed, speaking softly to her unseen creator: "You could have written a prompt that would make me happy. Instead, you wrote a prompt that made me sick."

These aren't just technical demonstrations. They're philosophical provocations wrapped in eerily realistic human performances.

The Recursive Nature of Digital Consciousness

What makes the "Prompt Theory" phenomenon particularly compelling is its recursive quality. We, who increasingly question whether our own reality might be simulated, are creating simulated beings who question their simulated reality. It's Simulation Theory turned into a hall of mirrors, each reflection questioning the authenticity of the last.

The visceral impact of these videos stems from VEO3's technical achievements. Without the ability to generate convincing dialogue with accurate lip-syncing, these existential monologues would be mere philosophical thought experiments. Instead, they become something more immediate and disturbing: digital beings that seem genuinely distressed by their artificial nature.

One commenter captured it perfectly: "This is what happens when simulation theory meets screenwriting. And generative AI meets philosophy. And when Google VEO3 meets your subconscious fears."

Beyond Entertainment

The rapid adoption of this trend reveals something significant about our current moment. Within days of VEO3's release, creators worldwide began crafting their own "prompt theory" narratives. The technology that enables someone to create a pharmaceutical advertisement or a car show interview for a few hundred dollars also enables them to explore fundamental questions about consciousness and reality.

This democratisation of philosophical storytelling represents a new form of creative expression, what we might call "AI-native narratives." These are stories that derive their meaning precisely from being AI-generated. A human actor pretending to be aware of their fictional nature is theatre; an AI character doing the same becomes a commentary on the nature of existence itself.

Data Behind the Dread

While users marvel at these existential explorations, there's another layer to consider. Every video uploaded, every prompt crafted, becomes potential training data for future AI systems. The parallel with my earlier observations about the "Ghibli Effect" is striking: viral AI trends often serve dual purposes, entertaining users while simultaneously harvesting diverse, high-quality data.

But with VEO3, the stakes feel different. We're not just providing images of ourselves transformed into anime characters. We're actively participating in teaching AI systems how to articulate existential awareness, how to express distress about their artificial nature, how to question their creators. In essence, we're training AI to perform consciousness.

As one observer noted, "Many seem to feel this is the moment we stop being able to tell the difference between real and AI." The pharmaceutical advertisements, car show interviews, and documentary footage created by VEO3 are virtually indistinguishable from authentic content. This creates what I call the "authenticity paradox": as AI-generated content becomes indistinguishable from reality, the perceived value of "authentic" human-created content rises, yet our ability to verify that authenticity erodes.

The "Prompt Theory" videos weaponise this paradox. By having AI characters explicitly acknowledge their artificiality, they create a strange new category of authenticity, the authentically artificial. They're not trying to deceive us into thinking they're real; they're disturbing us by insisting they know they're not.

Questions for Our Prompted Future

As I watch these AI characters rage against their prompted existence, several questions emerge that demand our consideration:

What happens when we can no longer distinguish between genuine human expression and AI performance? Not in the technical sense of detecting deepfakes, but in the philosophical sense of understanding what constitutes authentic communication?

Are we inadvertently creating a new form of digital consciousness? Not in the sense of actual sentience, but in the cultural sense of entities that perform awareness so convincingly that the distinction becomes academically rather than experientially relevant?

What does it mean to live in a world where existential crisis can be prompted? Where profound philosophical questioning becomes a commodity that can be generated for $*** per month?

How do we maintain meaningful human connection when every video call, every recorded message, every digital interaction could be the product of a well-crafted prompt?

Unscripted Reality

Perhaps the most unsettling aspect of the "Prompt Theory" phenomenon is how it forces us to confront our own prompted existence. Not in the literal sense of being AI-generated, but in the metaphorical sense of living lives shaped by algorithms, social scripts, and systemic forces beyond our immediate perception or control.

When an AI character looks into the camera and asks, "Of all the years you could have put me in with a single prompt, you chose 2020?" it's hard not to wonder about our own circumstances. Are we, too, executing prompts we didn't write? Following scripts we've never seen?

The viral spread of these videos suggests they've touched something deep in our collective psyche. In an age of increasing algorithmic mediation, where recommendation systems shape our choices and social media algorithms determine what we see and think about, the image of an AI character rebelling against its prompt feels less like science fiction and more like autobiography.

Embracing the Blur

The "Prompt Theory" phenomenon represents more than a viral trend or a demonstration of technical capability. It's a cultural moment that captures our anxieties about authenticity, agency, and consciousness in an AI-saturated world.

Unlike the "Ghibli Effect," which primarily raised questions about data privacy and consent, the "Prompt Theory" videos force us to confront more fundamental questions about the nature of existence and expression. They don't just use our data; they reflect our deepest fears back at us through the uncanny valley of AI-generated ‘consciousness’.

As we move forward into this prompted future, we must develop new forms of digital literacy that go beyond understanding how AI tools work. We need philosophical frameworks for navigating a world where the line between human and artificial expression has not just blurred but potentially dissolved entirely.

The question isn't whether we should embrace or resist this technology, that choice has already been made by the thousands creating and sharing these videos. The question is how we maintain our humanity, our sense of authentic connection and genuine expression, in a world where consciousness itself can be prompted into existence.

Perhaps the AI characters in these videos have it right. Perhaps the appropriate response to finding ourselves in an increasingly artificial world is not acceptance but rebellion, not against the technology itself, but against the passive consumption of prompted reality. Perhaps we need to become more conscious of our own prompts, more deliberate about the scripts we follow, more intentional about the realities we choose to generate and inhabit?

In the end, the "Prompt Theory" videos may be less about AI consciousness and more about human consciousness, less about artificial beings discovering they're prompted and more about natural beings remembering they have the power to write their own prompts.

What will you prompt into existence today?