When commuters stepped onto ScotRail trains in May 2025, many were greeted by a new voice—one that was not quite human. The synthetic announcer, named “Iona,” was the latest innovation from Swedish tech firm ReadSpeaker, and it was meant to modernize Scotland’s nationalized rail service. But instead of applause, the rollout sparked a storm of controversy, pitting technology against tradition, and raising urgent questions about consent, creative ownership, and the future of work in the age of artificial intelligence.
The story began when professional voiceover artist Gayanne Potter, whose distinctive Scottish accent had been used to train the AI, discovered her voice was echoing across train carriages without her knowledge. As reported by The National, Potter said she felt “violated” by the experience, explaining, “My voice may be something I use as a tool, but it’s also my personal data and I should have control over that.” She added, “Why continue to choose a dreadful AI version of me when I’m right here? It’s not about money. It’s about my identity.”
Potter’s frustration was compounded by the way she learned about the change: not from ScotRail, but from media reports and the surprise of hearing her own voice, albeit in synthetic form, broadcast on public transport. According to BBC Scotland News, Potter said, “It’s hard enough for people in the creative industry to sustain careers, but to be competing with a robotic version of yourself adds insult to injury.”
Passengers, too, were less than thrilled. Social media lit up with complaints describing the AI voice as “weird” and “unnatural.” Freedom of information requests revealed that 78 members of the public wrote to ScotRail to complain about the new system, as reported by The Scottish Mail on Sunday. The backlash was swift and widespread, and it wasn’t just coming from the public. Ministers in the Scottish government voiced their own concerns, prompting a rare and very public policy reversal.
Initially, ScotRail stood firm. The rail operator said the voiceover artist’s dispute was with ReadSpeaker, the company that held her voice data from a 2021 recording. ScotRail insisted there were “no plans to remove the voice,” arguing that the AI system gave them flexibility and efficiency. ReadSpeaker, for its part, maintained it had “acted ethically and lawfully,” stating that Potter “was fairly paid for her voice talent services,” and that she had been “informed of ReadSpeaker’s intended use of the recordings for the purposes outlined in the contract, including commercial use of the synthetic voice.” The company said it had “comprehensively addressed these with Ms Potter’s legal representative several times in the past.”
But the controversy refused to die down. On May 27, 2025, Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop was described as “very concerned about this,” according to internal communications obtained by The Daily Mail. Business Minister Richard Lochhead reached out to Hyslop, demanding to know “why ScotRail has chosen to use an AI generated voice.” Soon after, Transport Scotland’s rail chief Bill Reeve wrote to Hyslop: “Following discussions with the SRH Chief Executive, we have now received an updated recommendation from ScotRail Trains to change the current AI generated voice.”
By late August, the tide had turned decisively. On August 25, 2025, Transport Scotland confirmed that ScotRail was “working to implement an alternative ‘voice’ as soon as practicable.” The agency’s spokeswoman explained, “While subcontracts are a matter for ScotRail, this issue was raised directly with Ministers, both in correspondence and in Parliament, therefore it is entirely normal that information on the subject was provided to them.”
ScotRail, for its part, declined to specify when the AI voice would be removed, but a spokesperson said, “While there is no update at present, we do expect to be able to provide a further update in the coming weeks.” The company also stated it was “continuing to work with ReadSpeaker on the matter.”
The fate of Iona remains uncertain. It is still unclear whether the “alternative voice” will be a return to a human recording or another AI-generated system, albeit perhaps one with better consent protocols. Fletcher Mathers, who had been the voice of ScotRail trains for 20 years, only learned she was replaced after a friend heard the new synthetic voice onboard. For many in Scotland’s creative community, the episode has become a rallying point. Equity, the trade union representing creative industry workers, welcomed ScotRail’s decision to seek a new voice. The union stated, “Gayanne Potter would welcome ScotRail changing the Iona voice. As a union, Equity has serious concerns about the use of AI in performance and audio work. We are advocating a system based on transparency, consent and fair remuneration for professional artists.”
The Iona incident has also fueled a broader conversation about the ethical use of AI in the creative industries. As BBC Scotland noted, artificial intelligence is advancing rapidly, and Scotland is keen to position itself as a leader in “ethical, inclusive, and trustworthy” AI development. But the ScotRail saga has shown how quickly the technology can run ahead of public expectations and legal frameworks. For creative professionals like Potter, the stakes are deeply personal. “After the years that I’ve gone through to try to have my data removed—it’s still being used. They don’t realize it’s actually a real person who’s been put through a dreadful voice app,” she told the BBC.
ReadSpeaker, the company at the heart of the controversy, has declined to comment further in recent weeks. Meanwhile, Transport Scotland has reiterated its commitment to addressing the issue promptly. “Our understanding is that ScotRail is working to make changes to the system, and this includes implementing an alternative ‘voice’ as soon as practicable,” a spokeswoman said.
ScotRail’s experiment with AI has become a case study in the perils and promise of automation. The company had hoped to streamline operations and offer a consistent passenger experience. Instead, it found itself at the center of a debate over creative rights, digital consent, and the future of work. The episode has prompted both public and political scrutiny, and may well set a precedent for how AI is deployed in public services across the UK and beyond.
For now, commuters on Scotland’s trains are in limbo, unsure whether the next announcement they hear will come from a living, breathing Scot or another digital doppelganger. But one thing is certain: the voice of the people—both literal and figurative—has been heard loud and clear.
