TAWANDA CHARI
Winky D recently walked away with the Outstanding Video of the Year award at the 24th edition of the National Arts Merit Awards (NAMA), a contentious decision that ignited fiery debates across Zimbabwe’s music and creative circles. Directed by Jusa (who in some way is positioning himself as an unrivalled AI guru, I mean, good for him), the video leans heavily on AI-generated visuals, built using diffusion models and Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) technology that is fast becoming part of the global creative toolkit.
But beyond the headlines and the innovation narrative, a more uncomfortable question lingers: was it actually an outstanding video?
.jpeg "Winky D Fake Love AI video")
A question about quality and not necessarily AI
Some clarity will suffice here, right from the start: this piece is not focused on preaching an anti-AI argument. (Even though there are many points out there not to support it, but it's here now, with us, isn't it so?) Technology evolves, and creative industries must evolve with it. AI-generated visuals are already being used on a wide scale in film, advertising, and music videos worldwide, and there is nothing inherently wrong with embracing that shift.
What I want to address is an issue of quality, even if we are to restrict ourselves within the ambit of AI-usage acceptance in the arts. So, even as an AI-generated music video, "Fake Love" is not particularly good. When you closely look at you may get furious when you realize just how god awful it is.
Visually, it struggles with the same limitations seen in many early stage AI videos: inconsistent imagery, shallow emotional resonance, and a lack of visual progression that truly complements the song. It does not push the medium forward, nor does it redefine what an AI music video can be. There's nothing new or revolutionary brought forth by Jusa. At best, it is serviceable, and at worst, it is just plain forgettable. Which brings us to the fundamental point that this much-vaunted innovation alone should not be mistaken for excellence. Add some unique creative flair, please.
A category problem, not just a video problem
Placing an AI-generated video in the same competitive category as traditionally produced visuals introduces an uneven playing field. Conventional music videos require the coordination of directors, cinematographers, lighting teams, set designers, stylists, editors, and location managers – and this involves human labour, planning, and execution over weeks or months. It is a strenuous exercise.
An AI-generated visual bypasses much of that taxing process. Judging both under one umbrella without adjusting criteria ignores the fundamental differences in creative input. If animation and live action are separated in film awards, why should AI-generated visuals compete directly with non-AI productions?
If "Fake Love" had been assessed in a dedicated AI or experimental visuals category, the discussion would be very different.
Beyond the technical debate, there is another uncomfortable truism in that this video is not among the top tier music videos released in 2025. No sane person can include it say in their top 5 or top 10 list of excellent music visuals in 2025.
Zimbabwean music has seen visually striking releases over the past year. And we are talking here of videos with compelling concepts, memorable cinematography, and clear artistic intent. Against that backdrop, "Fake Love" does not stand out.
Which raises a crucial question: how did it get nominated in the first place?
For a full picture of just how horrendous that AI video is, read Malcom Mufunde's riveting piece 'Winky D's AI video'.
The irony of "Fake Love"
Perhaps the most ironic element of this entire moment is the reaction from fans.
The video has been showered with praise but not because of its visual excellence per se. It is being celebrated largely because it carries the name Winky D. Now that's a lot of bias already. Strip the artist’s identity away, and it is difficult to imagine the same level of enthusiasm.
In a twist almost too perfect to ignore, the love being given to "Fake Love" feels exactly like what the title suggests. Something that is conditional, performative, and driven by loyalty rather than honest evaluation. The applause is loud, but it is not necessarily genuine.
The nomination process is not always transparent, and without full insight into submissions, it is impossible to say which videos were put forward and which were overlooked.
However, it is hard to shake the feeling that "Fake Love" benefited less from its visual merit and more from the weight of the name attached to it. Winky D is undeniably one of Zimbabwe’s most important and influential artists. That legacy, however, should not automatically translate into awards in categories where the work itself does not clearly excel.
Why this conversation matters
AI is already reshaping music creation itself, from vocals to songwriting. That reality is not going away. But if the industry fails to create clear categories, disclosure standards, and evaluation criteria, we risk blurring the definition of excellence altogether.
Progress should raise standards, not lower them. Until AI-generated visuals are judged on their own terms, and traditional craft is respected for its depth and labour, decisions like this will continue to feel misplaced, no matter how big the artist involved.
.webp)
0 Comments