When AI Estate Agents Start Selling Dreams Instead of Reality
I’ve been thinking about how AI is creeping into every corner of our lives lately, and a discussion I stumbled across online really got under my skin. Someone mentioned how estate agents are now using AI tools to show potential buyers what rundown properties could look like after renovation. On the surface, it sounds helpful, right? But the more I think about it, the more it feels like we’re entering dangerous territory.
The whole thing reminds me of those glossy property magazines you see scattered around cafes in Toorak or South Yarra. You know the ones – where every decrepit weatherboard cottage is described as having “enormous potential” and “character features” when what they really mean is “the floorboards are rotting and there’s asbestos in the walls.” Now imagine that same creative marketing spin, but powered by AI that can literally show you a digital makeover of the property that makes it look like it belongs in Better Homes and Gardens.
The person who brought this up was absolutely spot on about how infuriating the language can be. They mentioned agents describing a collapsed roof as a “unique opportunity to make the house exactly how you want it.” I nearly spat out my coffee when I read that. It’s the kind of corporate doublespeak that would make Orwell roll over in his grave. But here’s the kicker – the AI isn’t just fixing up the house in question, it’s apparently also cleaning up all the other rundown properties in the background of the photos. So you’re not just buying into a fantasy version of your potential home, you’re buying into a fantasy version of the entire neighborhood.
This hits particularly close to home here in Melbourne, where the property market is already completely bonkers. We’ve got first-home buyers stretching themselves to breaking point just to get a foothold anywhere within 40 kilometers of the CBD. The last thing they need is AI-generated smoke and mirrors making them think they’re getting more bang for their buck than they actually are.
My teenage daughter was looking over my shoulder when I was reading about this, and she made a brilliant observation: “Dad, isn’t that basically like using Snapchat filters on houses?” And you know what? She’s absolutely right. Except instead of making your nose look smaller or your eyes bigger, these AI tools are making structural damage disappear and turning dilapidated properties into architectural marvels.
The ethical implications here are pretty staggering when you think about it. We already have laws around misleading advertising in real estate – agents can’t just make up square meterage or claim there’s parking when there isn’t. But what happens when the line between “artistic representation” and outright deception becomes completely blurred by AI? How do you regulate something that can generate photorealistic imagery of possibilities rather than actualities?
From a consumer protection standpoint, this feels like the Wild West all over again. The technology is advancing faster than our ability to create proper safeguards around it. And while I’m genuinely fascinated by what AI can do – the technical achievements are mind-blowing – I can’t shake the feeling that we’re creating tools that are going to be weaponized against ordinary people trying to make one of the biggest financial decisions of their lives.
The broader issue here isn’t really about real estate at all. It’s about how we’re going to navigate a world where AI can create compelling, believable content that may or may not reflect reality. Whether it’s property listings, news articles, or even academic research, we’re rapidly approaching a point where the average person won’t be able to distinguish between what’s real and what’s been AI-enhanced.
What really gets me is that there are probably legitimate, helpful ways to use this technology in real estate. Imagine if agents used AI to help buyers visualize accessibility improvements, or to show different furniture layouts in empty properties. But instead, we’re seeing it used to paper over serious structural issues and inflate property values.
The solution isn’t to ban the technology – that horse has already bolted. But we desperately need stronger disclosure requirements and clearer guidelines about when and how AI-generated content can be used in advertising. Buyers deserve to know when they’re looking at an actual photograph versus an AI-enhanced or generated image. It should be as clear and prominent as those “artist’s impression” disclaimers you see on apartment development billboards.
Maybe I’m being overly pessimistic, but I suspect this is just the beginning. If AI can make a house with a collapsed roof look move-in ready, what else is it going to start “fixing” in the photos we see every day? The technology itself isn’t evil, but the way it’s being deployed in service of already questionable marketing practices certainly is.
For now, the best defense is probably good old-fashioned skepticism. If a property listing seems too good to be true, it probably is – AI filters or not. And maybe it’s time to start treating online property photos the way we already treat social media posts: with a healthy dose of “that’s probably not what it actually looks like in real life.”