Project Details
Updated 07/05/26 · Edited by orgI run Frame Fellowship, a residential program that trains content creators to make AI safety topics legible to mass audiences. We select creators with early traction and put them through an intensive program in San Francisco with full financial support, mentorship from researchers and established creators, production infrastructure, and direct access to the AI safety ecosystem.
Our first cohort ran Jan-March 2026, where we received 150+ applications, interest from many organizations in the space, and selected 13. Fellows were award-winning filmmakers, journalists from leading newsrooms, and communicators who have made the transition to educating and preparing their communities for what's coming.
Some success stories-
1. Mateus De Souza
Mateus grew from 1,500 to 5,000+ followers and surged from 20,000 to 200,000 average views per video. He launched a YouTube channel focused on AI politics and industry accountability, got hired by Seismic for content strategy, and secured Future of Life Institute funding to continue full-time for a year after the fellowship. He also got a contract from BlueDot and is now in-trial with 80000 Hours for a new show similar to AI in Context.
2. Veronica Hylak
Veronica's videos on AI psychosis led three universities to reach out directly. A student built their thesis on preventing AI psychosis in system design specifically because of her content. She was invited to address university programs on AI safety risks and secured a contract from CAIS.
3. Michael Trazzi
Michael organised a 200+ person protest outside Anthropic, OpenAI, and xAI, attended by Scott Alexander, Nate Soares, and Daniel Kokotajlo, and covered by the New York Times and The Atlantic. His SB-1047 video is now a required resource in a UC Berkeley policy course. He is building "Stop the AI Race" into a sustained movement targeting a 1,000-person protest.
We also made headlines in The Washington Post, Transformer AI, and SF Standard.
mentors involved- Rob Miles, AI in Context (Chana Messinger), Species (Drew Spartz), Petr Lebedev, Doom Debates (Liron Shapira), Max Winga (Control AI) and many others.
advisors- Austin Chen (Cofounder and advisor), Ryan Kidd (MATS)
- a lot of awesome people interested in getting involved.
We are raising funding for cohort 2. This time we are increasing the size and quality of the program, and starting 2 tracks for the program-
1. Independent Track- Creators build their own messaging and trusted audiences.
2. Amplifier Track- fellows get embedded within impactful organizations to help their reach. We already have MATS, Apart Research, Andon Labs, Humans in Control, AI Digest, CAIS signed up.
we already have some promising applications from ex-journalists, top creators, and marketers- but looking to raise more funds before mass-marketing.
What we're aiming for in the next year:
- 120+ vetted communicators trained, with trusted communities, increasing AI salience across millions more people
- Become the first point of contact for AIS orgs and companies that want to communicate with audiences at scale.
- Incubate projects that make AI safety a more salient issue and build a greater public movement.
Theory of Impact
Updated 07/17/26 · By grantmaking.aiThe power of a good external-facing comms effort is underrated. AI in Context, If Anyone Builds It Everyone Dies, Rob Miles is the first interaction with AI Safety for many, including mine. It has the power to empower mainstream audiences to act by creating trust and relatability, and meeting them where they’re at- social media.
As AI climbs the list of things people care about, that attention can be leveraged: to empower action, build movements, and demand AI that enables democracy and agency. Additionally, it makes a compelling trigger for talented individuals to contribute to the field.
Content forms trust- which is upstream of every action anyone takes. AI Safety as a space has built a lot of infrastructure for internal facing comms- LessWrong, EA Forum, and conferences like EAG, but lags far behind mainstream external facing comms- while other players like a16z, OpenAI build their own distribution channels.
Moreover, in a world where development of software and automation of R&D becomes possible, distribution gets harder because human attention is limited. Attention is all you need.
3 pillars of change-
- Find & Accelerate new voices & projects through the fellowship and training resources
People
Updated 07/17/26 · By grantmaking.aiTeam Member
Funding Details
- Sep 30, 2025
- -
- 6 months
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- seeking funding for round 2 and scale-up
- Manifold for Charity
Track Record
Akshyae Singh track record-
- Frame- Cofounded, planned, raised funding, and executed the program as the only FTE all within 4 months. Founder-mode!!
- The Conversation- Founded, Led and organized a flagship event for AI Safety media at LightHaven inviting 100+ content creators, journalists, AI Safety comms folks, and organization leaders including Nate Soares, Aella, Jeffrey Ladish, MIRI, CAIS, Metr, MATS etc. Many got involved in AI Safety after coming to this event+ CAIS hired their head of comms through our event.
- EA SF- co-organizer behind EA SF in Summer and fall of 2025- reviving the community from 0 to 50.
- Bruin AI- Cofounder and CEO of AI consultancy doing 6 figures, with over 40+ engineers, working with fortune 100 clients such as Amazon, Google, and many others.
- KPMG- Built LLM workflows for CORE banking operations at Canada's largest bank.
- SAIRS- Cofounded one of California's largest AI Safety conferences with over 500+ attendees from 40+ academic institutions and leading companies.
- SaafSaans- Cofounder of a leading climate change activism platform in India. Started protesting for climate change and air pollution in India and grew it to 1000+ people, planting 500+ trees, and giving talks to college students as a 15 year old.
Discussion
Private comment. Only shown to approved funders and grant reviewers.
Private comment. Only shown to approved funders and grant reviewers.
I endorse this approach.
A couple of points for consideration:
* In round 1, you accepted 13 people and you've given success stories for 3. It would be helpful to see some clearer data on the results from round 1.
- It's a big jump from 13 fellows to 120 fellows. It would be helpful to see some transition targets, especially if you're not able to raise the full funding that you're seeking (and noting that funding in this round is limited to $50k, I believe).
- I like the idea of placing communications fellows in organisations - I think this model has a lot of potential and it's under-utilised so far. It's good to see that you're getting traction with impactful organisations on this.
- As a general point, I encourage people working in the comms field to consider the communications lessons learned from other thematic areas, including climate change. What kinds of messages resonate and motivate people to take action, what kinds of messages dont? There's a lot of research already done on this in other fields, and it's important for AI safety not to reinvent the wheel.
Good luck!
Hey Mark,
Thanks for your thoughts and endorsement.
Here's answers to your points-
* In round 1, you accepted 13 people and you've given success stories for 3. It would be helpful to see some clearer data on the results from round 1.
here's the full list of some achievements by fellows. Frame's goal is to find the next big communicators and it is expected that only a few will be outliers- and become the next big communicators for the space, even though overall all fellows did extremely well.
-
Mateus De Sousa- grew from 1,500 to 5,000+ followers, surged from 20,000 to 200,000 average views per video. Launched a YouTube channel on AI politics, went viral multiple times, got hired by Seismic for content strategy, secured FLI funding to go full-time for a year, and did events and fieldbuilding for BlueDot. in-trial for potential new show by 80,000 Hours
-
Veronica Hylak- doubled her following. Her videos on AI psychosis led three universities to reach out directly. A student built their thesis on preventing AI psychosis because of her content. Based on 100s of messages she received, she's building a research dataset on how populations are affected. Invited to address university programs on AI safety risks and secured a contract from CAIS.
-
Janet Oganah- posted every single day for 8 weeks. Grew 12x from 1,000 to 12,000 followers. Reached her Black community through AI safety content and expanded her network to Karen Hao, Timnit Gebru, and Tristan Harris. Now exploring AI safety grantmaking while continuing to make videos.
-
Michael Trazzi- organized a 200+ person protest outside Anthropic, OpenAI, and xAI, attended by Scott Alexander, Nate Soares, and Daniel Kokotajlo and many others, covered by the New York Times and The Atlantic. His SB-1047 video is now a required resource in a UC Berkeley policy course. Building "Stop the AI Race" into a sustained movement targeting a 1,000-person protest.
-
Mikey Posada- doubled his following, made consecutive viral videos, and secured a video contract from CAIS. Has paused AI safety content recently but has expressed interests in making videos every now and then.
-
Lauren Goldgrub- secured FLI funding post-fellowship, made several viral videos, and conducted events with BlueDot Impact. made a new YouTube channel with first 2 videos going viral (this is highly uncommon) .
-
Inken Paland- active keynote speaker on AI safety. Built the #1 AI safety podcast in Germany through the fellowship. Co-founded a Women in AI Safety community with 100+ registrations in its first few weeks. Received funding from BlueDot to grow the AI safety Germany ecosystem.
-
Gaetan Selle- best-performing video in 3 years (250K+ views) came out of the fellowship. Has continued to make awesome videos. Many people in France DM'd him saying they joined Pause AI movements because of his work.
-
Suzy Shepherd (visiting fellow)- launched her new film on AI safety post-fellowship- currently at 12k views. Her previous film reached 1.2M views.
-
Vin Sixsmith- Actively posting clippings of various AI Safety videos. Started an active AI Safety comms community on whatsapp- which is super active with over 80 members.
-
Jessica Riches(visiting fellow)- received research funding for her documentary on the impact of AI on sex workers and through that been shortlisted for Catapult funding. invited to the Vatican as a guest speaker at the launch of the Magnifica Humanitas Fondazione
-
Petr Salaba(visiting fellow)- still working on his feature film documentary, got connected to funders through Frame.
Ripple effects: Tanya Kalinina attended Frame events (originally as a creator with 250K followers), pivoted to AI safety, and is now hired by CAIS as their social media/comms person. Orgs across the space are actively reaching out to Frame to connect with comms talent.
---
It's a big jump from 13 fellows to 120 fellows. It would be helpful to see some transition targets, especially if you're not able to raise the full funding that you're seeking (and noting that funding in this round is limited to $50k, I believe).
- I think the goal isnt for every communicator to be part of the program. Different communicators are at different stages in their journey- there's some stages that are most optimized for support from external programs like Frame, and at other times the focus should be on transparent and accessible resource sharing, making rapid grants for ambitious communication projects, briefing already impactful communicators to consider talking about AI safety etc. I'd like to support all these stages.
- I still aim to find as many communicators in the sweet spot "most optimized for support from external programs like Frame" and create a higher supply for the field. I definitely think that if funding is met we can conduct 3 cohorts in the next year.
- If funding isnt met, I'd prolly be looking into other scaled down versions of the program (while I do think to attract the best communicators, we need an attractive and prestigious program)
Also, I like to set ambitious targets!
---
As a general point, I encourage people working in the comms field to consider the communications lessons learned from other thematic areas, including climate change. What kinds of messages resonate and motivate people to take action, what kinds of messages dont? There's a lot of research already done on this in other fields, and it's important for AI safety not to reinvent the wheel.
Im actively doing a lot of research on this and plan to share learnings with the entire field. My vision for Frame is to take ownership of solving many bottlenecks on the comms side (this being one of them)
Thanks Akshyae! I've previously endorsed this application, but the additional information you've provided is very helpful context!
[deleted]
Hi @Sheikh Abdur Raheem Ali - please edit this comment to remove inflammatory language and personal attacks, or we'll have to delete it.
We have deleted your other comment that contained cursing, I appreciate you re-wrote a sanitized version.
We like passion but don't like comments that would kick the community off with the wrong tone or culture.
Yes, of course. I understand that expectations and conversational norms vary by platform, and I’m happy to revise the comment and engage more professionally going forward. Thank you for letting me know, and I appreciate the opportunity to correct it.
Frame says its objective is to reach mass audiences, but most of the evidence presented demonstrates success within the existing AI-safety ecosystem: contracts from AI-safety organisations, grants from AI-safety funders, attendance at AI-safety events, and engagement from already sympathetic institutions. Those may be valuable outcomes, but they are not the same as establishing durable influence among genuinely mainstream or ideologically diverse audiences. The proposal should clarify which audience it is actually optimising for and provide evidence that its selection and training model can reach beyond the community funding it.
Hey @Sheikh Abdur Raheem Ali ,
Frame says its objective is to reach mass audiences, but most of the evidence presented demonstrates success within the existing AI-safety ecosystem
Each of our fellow had different audience demographics that they were catering to. We have detailed data on each of our fellow's audiences- they are "mainstream or ideologically diverse audiences". For eg- Janet Oganah catered to a largely black + 90% female community- both of which are underrepresented audiences. Also most of the AI Safety audience is on X, LessWrong, EA Forum, and we are not focused on these platforms because we want to cater to mainstream audiences- many of which are present on Instagram, Youtube etc.
Jaan Talinn and AISTOF already donated so not like it's gonna hurt you
The $280k AISTOF grant mentioned was for Cohort 1.0.
Nice slogan but it sounds like bullshit to me. Which to be fair is in distribution for this sort of thing but It's not even artful bullshit. You should be a surgeon with it.
It is well known that trust has shifted form institutions to personal brands. Many CEOs have more followers than their respective companies. People want to listen to people. Customers buy from brands they trust. For AI Safety, mainstream audiences want to listen to people they trust.
It can be allowed for there to be more than one content creating thing in AI safety, but a section saying "how we are different from plzdontkillus"
Frame's first cohort ran in January 2026. PDKU ran in July 2026.
We are also different formats of programs- Frame is a 10-week program focused on stronger mentor support, access to production resources, and the end-goal is to establish fellows as reliable AI Safety communicators. We could be comparable to Tarbell Center for AI Journalism- for AIS content. PDKU could be compared to Inkhaven.
Go out of the house, socialise a little, learn to work with people outside EA. Video content does not have the same dynamics as written content. You want a mass audience, you go to the people who have the mass audiences.
Frame conducted frequent events with mainstream content creators who had no idea what AI Safety meant. Many learnt a lot and some even made content. Many Frame fellows also went to SXSW, and fellows were able to connect with mainstream content creators such as Marques Brownlee, Catherine Goetz, Harper Carroll, Cleo Abram's team, Gary Vee's team, DOAC team, Mr Beast team, Alberta Tech, and many many other non-ai safety creators.
Go and x-risk pill PewDiePie. Bring some Instagram influencers along to the next "exec retreat"
There are some AI Safety orgs that are focused on this- the most popular one being Control AI. We want to explore this in the future, but for now our focus is on building some AI Safety comms champions for the field, and expand from there. I did conduct an event https://the-conversation.ai with the purpose of bringing together mainstream creators, journalists, filmmakers etc. together , and hope to do a second bigger iteration.
Hope this addresses few of the things you raised. At Frame, I am putting in a lot of effort towards solving some of the problems you described.
[deleted]
Thanks for the detailed response. A few clarifications and follow-up questions:
both of which are underrepresented audiences.
My concern was specifically about ideological diversity, rather than demographic diversity. Reaching audiences that are underrepresented by gender or ethnicity may be valuable, but it does not necessarily demonstrate that Frame is reaching people outside the existing political, cultural, or institutional constituencies that are already receptive to AI-safety messaging.
Also most of the AI Safety audience is on X, LessWrong, EA Forum…
I am not convinced this accurately represents the broader AI-safety audience. A significant amount of engagement also happens through YouTube channels, livestreams, podcasts, Discord communities, reading groups, and other informal spaces. The proposal would benefit from a broader account of where AI-safety audiences already exist and how Frame’s work differs from or complements those communities.
we are not focused on these platforms because we want to cater to mainstream audiences—many of which are present on Instagram, YouTube etc.
I think this raises an important ethical and strategic question. Short-form platforms can provide substantial reach, but their engagement incentives may also encourage addictive consumption, oversimplification, sensationalism, and shallow understanding. Frame should explain how it intends to use these platforms responsibly and how it will measure outcomes beyond views, followers, or engagement.
The $280k AISTOF grant mentioned was for Cohort 1.0.
This is helpful. I had initially understood that funding to be for Cohort 2, so I appreciate the clarification.
It is well known that trust has shifted from institutions to personal brands…
This still feels too broad and underspecified. Even if audiences increasingly trust individual creators, it does not follow that creator-led communication will reliably improve public understanding of AI risk or motivate useful action. I would like to see a clearer causal model:
- What kind of trust is being created?
- How is that trust measured?
- What actions is it expected to produce?
- Why are individual creators better positioned than institutions for this particular topic?
- What safeguards prevent trust from becoming personality-driven persuasion without sufficient epistemic standards
establish fellows as reliable AI Safety communicators.
“Reliable” needs a more precise definition. Does it mean factually accurate, aligned with expert consensus, transparent about uncertainty, persuasive, institutionally approved, or consistently productive? These are different properties and may sometimes conflict. The proposal should specify the standards fellows are expected to meet and how those standards are evaluated.
fellows were able to connect with mainstream content creators…
Could you elaborate on what “connect with” means? Did fellows briefly meet these people, exchange contact information, develop ongoing relationships, collaborate on content, receive advice, or secure commitments? The current wording makes it difficult to assess the significance of these interactions.
We want to explore this in the future…
That makes sense, but it would be useful to know what milestones would cause Frame to move from training emerging communicators toward partnering with creators who already have large mainstream audiences.
Highlighting the combined subscriber count of attendees can communicate potential reach, but it may also overstate the practical value of the event unless those creators subsequently produced relevant content or formed meaningful collaborations. Concrete downstream outcomes would be more persuasive than aggregate audience size + RPM + CTR alone.
Finally, Frame’s own public audience currently appears quite small. That does not invalidate the program, especially if Frame primarily operates as an incubator rather than a media brand. However, it does make it more important to demonstrate that the organisation itself has strong practical expertise in audience development, distribution, and creator growth.
Overall, your response addresses some of my concerns, but I still think the application needs clearer definitions, stronger evidence of mainstream and ideological reach, more precise descriptions of partnerships, and a more developed theory of how creator trust translates into useful AI-safety outcomes.
I believe this is an incredibly important project. Expanding public understanding of AI safety can help build broader support for AI safety and create the momentum needed to translate ideas into policy. Thank you for taking on this much-needed and often overlooked work.
Thanks for your thoughts Pim, and the support that Successif has been able to provide!
I endorsed this grant proposal because:
- Short-form video content seems like the dominant media format in the US today. We need political will to enact government policy for AI safety, particularly when this conflicts with donor interests. Therefore, we should inform the public about AI safety priorities via short-form video content!
- I advise Frame Fellowship in an unpaid capacity. I know Akshyae and think he is a competent founder. Frame 1.0 went really well, in my estimation. More Frame seems great!
I recommend the maximum funding of $50k.
Excited to see this recommendation
@Akshyae Singh, please let me know:
- Did you receive funding from anywhere since submitting this application, or has the funding ask changed for any other reason?
- Please confirm your commitment to post quarterly updates on how the project is going
Private comment. Only shown to approved funders and grant reviewers.
Private comment. Only shown to approved funders and grant reviewers.
Super cool project to make AI risks and safety work more mainstream and reach a wider audience! I'm currently hosting a one-day hackathon with Frame on content creation in London and think we need more of these events happening in the space.
Private comment. Only shown to approved funders and grant reviewers.
Private comment. Only shown to approved funders and grant reviewers.