Alex Pretti AI Scandal As MSNBC 'Beautifies' His Face For TV And Memorial

Outrage has erupted after MSNBC broadcast a digitally altered image of Alex Pretti, the 37-year-old intensive care nurse shot dead by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis. The image showed him with enhanced facial features and a more muscular physique.

The controversy has struck a raw nerve in a community already reeling from Pretti's death on 24 January. For many, the broadcast was not simply a matter of aesthetics but a distortion of memory, raising questions about how technology can reshape public perception of tragedy.

Family Condemns Manipulation and Misinformation

Pretti's family described the misinformation as 'disgusting lies' and 'unacceptable manipulation' of their loved one's memory. His sister, Micayla Pretti, told the Associated Press that Alex 'touched more lives than he probably ever realised' and that digital alterations of his image distort the truth of who he was.

In the MSNBC broadcast, the AI-driven edits reportedly included a tan, a stronger jawline, a narrower nose, shortened forehead, better teeth, broadened shoulders, thicker neck, and even biceps enhancement.

A photo collage circulating online also caused confusion, showing a mix of authentic Pretti images and pictures of a different individual in women's clothing. This further inflamed the debate, as social media users accused the network of misleading the public and trivialising Pretti's death.

Eyewitness Accounts Challenge Official Reports

The broadcast and memorial image controversy follows the highly contentious circumstances of Pretti's death on 24 January. Videos analysed by BBC Verify show that Pretti, filming federal immigration agents with his mobile phone, was pepper-sprayed and wrestled to the ground. Eyewitnesses insist he was unarmed, contradicting the Department of Homeland Security's account that he resisted with a handgun.

Less than a second after an agent reportedly drew a pistol from Pretti's waist area, ten shots were fired, fatally wounding him. Minnesota law allows legal gun owners to carry concealed weapons with permits, and Pretti had a permit, though no firearm was visible in the moments before he was shot.

Governor Tim Walz described Pretti as someone who 'went to work to care for veterans, someone who was a valued co-worker, someone who relished and lived in this state in a big way.' His mother, Susan Pretti, highlighted his love of the outdoors and environmental concerns, emphasising that he 'loved this country, but he hated what people were doing to it.'

The AI-enhanced image quickly went viral online, sparking a mixture of anger, disbelief, and debate. Critics accused MSNBC of turning Pretti into a 'martyr made for television,' prioritising aesthetics over truth. Many argued that the network's decision undermined the gravity of the incident and the dignity of the victim.

Social media posts highlighted how AI editing can erase the human realities behind tragic events. Some users compared it to historical practices of glorifying public figures, while others warned of a dangerous precedent in which technology distorts memory and public perception.

Supporters of Pretti have used the controversy to redirect focus to the systemic issues his death highlighted, including US immigration enforcement, First Amendment rights, and public safety during federal operations.

Ethical Questions About AI And Media

The incident raises significant ethical questions about the role of artificial intelligence in journalism. While AI can enhance visuals and improve aesthetics, its use in portraying real-life individuals, particularly victims of violence, remains contentious. Critics say that beautifying Pretti 'erases the real person and sanitises tragedy for entertainment or broadcast purposes.'

Media ethics experts argue that networks must balance technological capabilities with responsibility. Many online commentators insist that the human story, including flaws and authenticity, should never be sacrificed for visual appeal. As AI continues to evolve, cases like this highlight the urgent need for guidelines and public accountability in news media.