Protecting Holocaust memory in the age of AI will be harder than ever

First-hand accounts gave voice to lived experience, while preserved camps, killing sites, and memorials resisted denial through their sheer material existence. Even for those unable to visit these places, memory was transmitted through carefully contextualised education grounded in evidence and scholarship.

That model is now under strain. The way people encounter the Holocaust is changing rapidly. Increasingly, particularly among younger audiences, initial exposure comes through social media feeds rather than classrooms, museums, memorials or books. Short-form videos and algorithmically promoted content often prioritise emotional impact over historical accuracy. What was once approached as a subject demanding time and seriousness is now often encountered in fragments, alongside entertainment and opinion, with little distinction between the two.

A significant part of this content is deliberately misleading. Explicit denial and conspiracy-driven reinterpretations circulate widely online, often coded to evade moderation or framed as opinion rather than ‘distortion’. These narratives are not new, but digital platforms have given them unprecedented reach, allowing bad-faith actors to exploit ambiguity and outrage to seed doubt and undermine historical consensus.

Yet distortion does not always come from malice. Even well-meaning “explainers” can strip events of complexity and prioritise shock over understanding. In the attention economy, simplified narratives travel faster than carefully considered and evidenced accounts. Holocaust distortion does not always manifest itself as lies - it often appears as omission or imprecision.

This shift coincides with another unavoidable reality. As we mark 81 years since the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau this January, survivor testimony - long the most powerful bridge between past and present - is becoming rarer. Eva Schloss, the Austrian Holocaust survivor and step-sister of Anne Frank, devoted her life to bearing witness and preserving Holocaust memory, and died earlier this year. The loss of these voices leaves a profound gap, one that demands a thoughtful and ethical replacement.

Advances in artificial intelligence have made it increasingly easy to generate images, voices and narratives that appear authentic while having no basis in historical evidence. Online, this has begun to include fabricated scenes of life in the camp or simulated survivor voices. These videos are frequently presented as a way to keep memory alive in a digital culture, but they risk doing the opposite.

The real danger lies in the kind of engagement this material encourages. AI-generated content can create a sense of familiarity that feels like understanding. Brief, emotionally charged encounters give the impression that something has been learned, when in reality the slow, demanding work of reflection has been bypassed.

The future of Holocaust remembrance will not look like its past. As survivor voices fade, the challenge becomes honouring them with integrity rather than trying to imitate them artificially. This means resisting shortcuts, insisting on evidence and refusing to allow technology to reshape history into something more palatable (or worse, more viral) than the truth.

____________________

Michaela Küchler, Secretary General of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).

LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.

To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk