If not they most definitely are listening to other music that influences them. If you have proof that such a producer listens to 0 music feel free to share it.
Actual artists who need years to create a few hours of handcrafted content don't have a chance in an environment where hundreds of hours of slop can be generated in less than a day for a few hundred bucks. Platforms like Deezer recognize they need to address that imbalance somehow or they'll eventually lose their high quality contributors in a vicious cycle if it becomes impossible to compete.
Who decides that? We do, collectively. Why do we have that power? Because we define art. Why do only humans have this power? Because art is an innately human thing, so we get to decide.
How do you imagine that happening?
But AI music can make it even harder for people to eke out a living as musicians, since they are competing with something that costs far less to make. And some people who would otherwise learn how to create music themselves will instead choose not to learn this skill because it is easier to use AI.
The net effect is a diminished culture.
People who create AI music are largely not sharing it with others for any reason other than to create a revenue stream. They are also not consuming new AI music to be able to develop influences and synthesize new ideas. The system builds brick walls where there was once osmosis.
How can art evolve under these conditions?