Is artificial intelligence dangerous to our political culture? And what if anything should we do to regulate political ads that present a false picture of reality? With the increased public availability of artificial intelligence tools, every aspect of life is under examination.
In the political world, many worry that AI will contribute to our already fractured and polarized politics, spreading disinformation and stirring up resentments with damaging political narratives.
Some have pointed to a recent ad run by the Republican National Committee that employed AI to generate images to illustrate the dangers of a re-election of President Biden and Vice President Harris.
The ad asked the question, “What if the weakest president we’ve ever had were reelected?” — and then proceeded to sketch out potential crises in a Biden second term: a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, failure of U.S. banks, accelerated border crossings and out of control crime.
What was unique about this ad, is that the images of these hypothetical crises were generated by AI. And to their credit, the RNC had a printed disclosure in the ad that the video was “built entirely with AI imagery.”
This ad has been cited by some lawmakers who have proposed legislation that would require that all use of AI be disclosed in political ads. The lawmakers cite the ad to highlight the dangers of AI, but also praise the ad makers for their written disclosure that AI had been employed.
Why shouldn’t every ad that employs AI be required to include such a disclosure? While the dangers of manipulated video and the creation of false reality are concerns, there are four reasons why we should proceed with caution in seeking such regulation.
First, what is AI? And is it really AI that is the issue? While AI can be employed to create and manipulate images and video, the ability to create lifelike generated images has existed long before our recent interest in AI. AI itself may have good or bad uses. AI might help campaigns reach new audiences, manage their campaigns more effectively, optimize advertising spending. But a focus on regulating AI is far too broad an aim. And Congress would struggle to put forth a clear definition of what constitutes AI.
Second, technology changes quickly, and any law in this area would have a hard time keeping up. Any law in this area would likely be outdated by the time the next election cycle came around.
Third, even if the focus is on AI generation of video, any law would risk sweeping up long established and legitimate uses of modified images and video. Take for example, the idea of morphing the face of one person into another. TIME magazine published an image of President Trump morphed into Vladimir Putin on its cover. And for many years, campaign ads have tried to tie a candidate to another less popular figure with video changing one person into another. And what about satire or cartoons?
Fourth, while there are separate challenges with the idea of regulating private individuals from spreading manipulated images, the current regulation we have on political advertising already provides good protection. Currently, the campaigns, parties and groups that run ads are subject to disclosure and disclaimer regulations where they must state in the ad who paid for the ad, and disclose campaign spending to various institutions.
The current system already polices problematic ads. These requirements allow for robust criticism of the campaign if they use misleading video or messages. Government wisely stays out of judging the truth or falsehood of ads, but the disclosure requirements often lead to campaigns retracting ads or facing political backlash for their messages. While AI will only grow in its significance, we should not overreact, blame it for the ills of our political culture, and be cautious in regulating AI and political advertising.
John Fortier
Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Commentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
Is the US looking for a war?
7 hrs ago
Peter Zeihan
How future generations could shift US support for Israel
Yesterday
Peter Zeihan
Why election of European Commission president is so important
Wednesday
Peter Zeihan
‘Both completely corrupt’: What Americans think of Biden, Trump
Tuesday
Dr. Frank Luntz
Do we need new laws for AI-generated political ads?
John Fortier
Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
By Straight Arrow News
It’s the Wild West when it comes to regulating AI-generated political advertising. As new technology explodes, many are questioning whether we need more oversight of ads made with artificial intelligence. Right now, campaign ads don’t have to disclose if they were created or manipulated by AI, and some Democratic lawmakers are hoping to change that.
Straight Arrow News contributor John Fortier urges caution. He believes any new law that regulates AI-generated ads would “risk sweeping up long-established and legitimate uses of modified images and video.”
Currently, the campaigns, parties and groups that run ads are subject to disclosure and disclaimer regulations where they must state in the ad who paid for the ad, and disclose campaign spending to various institutions.
The current system already polices problematic ads. These requirements allow for robust criticism of the campaign if they use misleading video or messages. Government wisely stays out of judging the truth or falsehood of ads, but the disclosure requirements often lead to campaigns retracting ads or facing political backlash for their messages. While AI will only grow in its significance, we should not overreact, blame it for the ills of our political culture, and be cautious in regulating AI and political advertising.
Is artificial intelligence dangerous to our political culture? And what if anything should we do to regulate political ads that present a false picture of reality? With the increased public availability of artificial intelligence tools, every aspect of life is under examination.
In the political world, many worry that AI will contribute to our already fractured and polarized politics, spreading disinformation and stirring up resentments with damaging political narratives.
Some have pointed to a recent ad run by the Republican National Committee that employed AI to generate images to illustrate the dangers of a re-election of President Biden and Vice President Harris.
The ad asked the question, “What if the weakest president we’ve ever had were reelected?” — and then proceeded to sketch out potential crises in a Biden second term: a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, failure of U.S. banks, accelerated border crossings and out of control crime.
What was unique about this ad, is that the images of these hypothetical crises were generated by AI. And to their credit, the RNC had a printed disclosure in the ad that the video was “built entirely with AI imagery.”
This ad has been cited by some lawmakers who have proposed legislation that would require that all use of AI be disclosed in political ads. The lawmakers cite the ad to highlight the dangers of AI, but also praise the ad makers for their written disclosure that AI had been employed.
Why shouldn’t every ad that employs AI be required to include such a disclosure? While the dangers of manipulated video and the creation of false reality are concerns, there are four reasons why we should proceed with caution in seeking such regulation.
First, what is AI? And is it really AI that is the issue? While AI can be employed to create and manipulate images and video, the ability to create lifelike generated images has existed long before our recent interest in AI. AI itself may have good or bad uses. AI might help campaigns reach new audiences, manage their campaigns more effectively, optimize advertising spending. But a focus on regulating AI is far too broad an aim. And Congress would struggle to put forth a clear definition of what constitutes AI.
Second, technology changes quickly, and any law in this area would have a hard time keeping up. Any law in this area would likely be outdated by the time the next election cycle came around.
Third, even if the focus is on AI generation of video, any law would risk sweeping up long established and legitimate uses of modified images and video. Take for example, the idea of morphing the face of one person into another. TIME magazine published an image of President Trump morphed into Vladimir Putin on its cover. And for many years, campaign ads have tried to tie a candidate to another less popular figure with video changing one person into another. And what about satire or cartoons?
Fourth, while there are separate challenges with the idea of regulating private individuals from spreading manipulated images, the current regulation we have on political advertising already provides good protection. Currently, the campaigns, parties and groups that run ads are subject to disclosure and disclaimer regulations where they must state in the ad who paid for the ad, and disclose campaign spending to various institutions.
The current system already polices problematic ads. These requirements allow for robust criticism of the campaign if they use misleading video or messages. Government wisely stays out of judging the truth or falsehood of ads, but the disclosure requirements often lead to campaigns retracting ads or facing political backlash for their messages. While AI will only grow in its significance, we should not overreact, blame it for the ills of our political culture, and be cautious in regulating AI and political advertising.
How do presidential debates work?
President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump have agreed to two debates leading up to the 2024 U.S. elections, with the first in June and the second in September. That development followed months of public speculation about whether there would be any debates between the two candidates at all and, if so, what those…
Jun 6
US elections have become much more secure since 2000
Donald Trump and his allies successfully convinced many Americans that U.S. voting systems are flawed and unreliable in order to justify his attempts to remain in power after losing to Joe Biden in the 2020 election. Today, much of that skepticism still endures. Americans now confront the problem of how to restore public trust in…
May 2
SCOTUS case on threat of disinformation raises thorny questions
The Supreme Court recently heard arguments concerning government communications with social media platforms in Murthy v. Missouri. Plantiffs in the case claim that government agencies pressured social media companies to remove or restrict posts spreading disinformation about vaccines, elections and COVID-19. Straight Arrow News contributor John Fortier delves into the complex questions raised by the…
Mar 28
Trump v. Anderson is more complicated than it looks
The Supreme Court case Trump v. Anderson will decide whether former President Donald Trump is eligible to run as a candidate for president in 2024. Some constitutional law experts have argued that Trump cannot run as a candidate, citing what they say is a clear violation of the 14th Amendment in the U.S. Constitution, which…
Feb 29
Era of Iowa, New Hampshire kicking off election season is ending
In American politics, tradition dictates that Iowa and New Hampshire kick off the election season as the two major parties elect their primary candidates. Recently, however, Democrats have suggested revising this tradition, arguing that Iowa and New Hampshire do not present an optimal, comprehensive sample of American voters, and suggesting states like South Carolina or…
Feb 1
Underreported stories from each side
Group accuses Pa. teachers union of illegally using money to back Shapiro’s 2022 campaign
8 sources | 0% from the left
Getty Images
Some House Republicans slam Vance as Trump’s VP pick: ‘The worst choice’
8 sources | 0% from the right
Reuters
Latest Stories
Congress still trying to figure out how to reduce wasteful military spending
Watch 2:29
3 hrs ago
US Navy, Air Force making waves with new weapons at RIMPAC
Watch 6:03
3 hrs ago
Israeli PM Netanyahu meets with Trump at Mar-a-Lago
Watch 2:54
3 hrs ago
Growing US nuclear power resurgence reaches the nation’s heartland
Watch 1:19
3 hrs ago
Beer from the sun, other solar thermal projects get government funding
Watch 2:04
3 hrs ago
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
Trump has an excellent opportunity with Black voters
8 hrs ago
Star Parker
Don’t fall for GOP’s cheap racist attacks on Kamala Harris
9 hrs ago
Dr. Rashad Richey
Americans must reject Trump to defend our democracy
Yesterday
Jordan Reid
Why all the changes in European parliamentary governments?
Wednesday
Newt Gingrich