That's my guess. I'm also guessing that this is one of those "we'll do this and then we're surprised when the viewership drops significantly but we can't figure out why and oh, I've got a genius idea, let's use real background actors" situations. The problem with those situations is that you can ruin something quickly but it takes years to salvage and rebuild it.The crazy thing about the AI portion is that AI isn't really there to do this, not well enough for a major motion picture anyway. So the studios are being greedy about technology that doesn't even exist. Or maybe they don't care that the results are still kind of crappy and noticeable??
I think AI paired with studio greed has the chance to severely harm the TV and movie industry. Personally, I think you already see it with animation. Computer generated movies just don't have the same appeal to me as hand-drawn movies do. It's just not the same, not just because it's computer generated (although, it does make a big difference for me because there's something that hand-drawn characters have that computer generated characters don't have even if I can't quite say what it is. Maybe the human aspect that goes into a drawing? I don't know) but also because it allows the studios to produce more in the same amount of time. I find that it has given the movies a mass-production aspect and the feel that the importance is to put out a movie/series rather than tell a story.
I think the more humanity you lose in art, the more you lose the relatable and emotional side of things and the ability to connect with the audience.