PreprintCited by 12Misinformation and Its ImpactsLaw, Rights, and FreedomsDigitalization, Law, and Regulation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deepfake 2024: Will Citizens United and Artificial Intelligence Together Destroy Representative Democracy?

Open access
Painter, Richard W.·2023·SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract

Deepfakes – computer generated counterfeit videos and audios of people saying and doing things they never said or did – are proliferating on social media and increasingly will be used to target candidates in elections. Citizens United v. FEC and cases decided in its aftermath have opened the floodgates of dark money funded electioneering communications, and some of this money will be spent on deepfakes made and disseminated by persons unknown. Some may originate outside the United States, as deepfake becomes a new instrument for foreign interference in U.S. elections. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has been asked by public interest organizations and Members of Congress, to do something about deepfakes but has deadlocked as to whether to act. Bills are pending in Congress to address the problem, but some of these bills are overbroad and rely on criminal sanctions, exacerbating constitutional problems. No bill addressing deepfakes in elections has passed either house. This Article first summarizes the more general problem: unlimited and undisclosed dark money in politics, almost nonexistent legal remedies for foreign interference in U.S. elections, and the rise of AI generated deepfake video and audio. This Article then explores currently proposed regulatory remedies for deepfake in elections, none of which are sufficiently robust to address the problem effectively and, with deadlock in both the FEC and Congress, none of which are likely to become law. This Article then explores an alternative: publicly and privately funded Deepfake Warnings and a FEC sponsored Deepfake Alert System that could respond quickly to deepfake electioneering communications by identifying them as such in the same social media platforms where they emerge, and other media platforms as well. Enforcement of new regulations prohibiting deepfake in elections will be hampered by practical and constitutional problems, whereas public and private investment in timely public education about fake video and audio recordings could help reorient voters back toward the real world.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2139/ssrn.4558216

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Better regulation from institutions and enhanced cooperation by social media platforms are understood as the necessary and sufficient condition, or at least the most urgent measure, to protect digital citizens and democratic institutions, with no complementary role envisaged for societal dialogue, AI education, and knowledge-sharing on online experiences.

    “Still, better regulation from institutions and enhanced cooperation by social media platforms are understood as the necessary and sufficient condition, or to the very least as the most urgent measure, to protect digital citizens and democratic institutions, with no complementary role envisaged for societal dialogue, AI education, and knowledge-sharing on online experiences (Painter, 2023;Pawelec,”
  • Communication experts and journalists are therefore left to bridge the AI-generated information gap by either flagging fake content or by fact-checking the content of deepfakes.

    “Communication experts and journalists are therefore left to bridge the AI-generated information gap by either flagging fake content or by fact-checking the content of deepfakes (Painter, 2023).”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Many of these organizations, like Citizens United itself, are established under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. See 26 U.S. Code � 501(c)4 (tax exempt status for "[c]ivic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare
  2. See Lieu, 2010, Order (dismissing suit brought against the FEC by Rep, Senator Jeff Merkley, State Senator John Howe, Zephyr Teachout, and Michael Wager asking the Circuit Court to overturn its decision in SpeechNow, 562
  3. Mcconnell V, 2003, upholding limits on soft money contributions used to register voters and increase attendance at the polls, 185
  4. Mcconnell V, 2003, Federal Election Commission. 540 U.S
  5. Ed Arthur Seldon, 1979, Tax Avoision: The Economic, Legal, and Moral Inter-Relationships Between Avoidance and Evasion (Institute of Economic Affairs
  6. 2021, Top 10 Funniest Presidential Impersonations on SNL, You Tube
  7. New York Times v. Sullivan
  8. 2023, (for purposes of criminal prosecution for online harassment, to establish that a statement is a "true threat" unprotected by the First Amendment, the State must prove that the defendant had a subjective understanding of the statements' threatening nature
  9. See State Of Missouri V. Biden, 2023, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, through public pressure campaigns, private meetings, and other forms of direct communication, regarding what Defendants described as "disinformation," "misinformation," and "malinformation," have colluded with and/or coerced social-media platforms to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social-media platforms, 22
  10. Theoretically, Biden could sue for defamation for an ad such as this, but his suit would have to meet the very high pleading standard required under New York Times v. Sullivan, supra note 48 supra
  11. See Lawrence, 2015, How Money Corrupts Congress and a Plan to Fix it
  12. See Richard, Taxation Only with Representation, supra

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Painter, R. W.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Painter, Richard W.
Venue
SSRN Electronic Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023
ISSN
1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386947162
Cited by
6
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • eYLS (Yale Law School) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Law › Law, Rights, and Freedoms
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
Keywords
deepfakes, Citizens United, dark money, electioneering communications, foreign interference in elections, Federal Election Commission, AI regulation, election disinformation, constitutional limits on regulation, criminal sanctions, voter education, representative democracy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review