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 accessAbstract
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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,”
From Deepfakes, Democracy, and the Ethics of Synthetic Media: A Synthesis of the SOLARIS Project (2026) · cites this paper as Painter, 2023
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).”
From Deepfakes, Democracy, and the Ethics of Synthetic Media: A Synthesis of the SOLARIS Project (2026) · cites this paper as Painter, 2023
Citations
Cites
Taxation Only with Representation: The Conservative Conscience and Campaign Finance ReformPreprint
Painter, R. W. (2016) · SSRN Electronic Journal · Cited by 1
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- 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
- 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
- Mcconnell V, 2003, upholding limits on soft money contributions used to register voters and increase attendance at the polls, 185
- Mcconnell V, 2003, Federal Election Commission. 540 U.S
- Ed Arthur Seldon, 1979, Tax Avoision: The Economic, Legal, and Moral Inter-Relationships Between Avoidance and Evasion (Institute of Economic Affairs
- 2021, Top 10 Funniest Presidential Impersonations on SNL, You Tube
- New York Times v. Sullivan
- 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
- 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
- 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
- See Lawrence, 2015, How Money Corrupts Congress and a Plan to Fix it
- See Richard, Taxation Only with Representation, supra
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lin, T. T. C. (2025) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2025.285 · Cited by 3
The Spread of Deepfakes in Digital Networks
Tonello, T., Dimitrova, A., Fenga, L., Biazzo, L., & Jacona, A. (2026) · doi:10.18690/um.feri.2.2026.2 · Cited by 1
Sun, Y. T., Fu, X., Zhang, Z., Zhang, N., Zhang, H., & Cao, Y. (2024) · IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT) · doi:10.1109/wi-iat62293.2024.00129 · Cited by 1
Deepfakes, Democracy, and the Ethics of Synthetic Media: A Synthesis of the SOLARIS Project
(2026) · University of Maribor Press · doi:10.18690/um.feri.2.2026
The Deepfake Challenge: Targeted AI Policy Solutions for StatesPreprint
Ball, D. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5073572
Bhuiyan, E., Islam, S., Al-Mamun, A., & Uddin, A. (2025) · OALib · doi:10.4236/oalib.1113311
GERÇEK Mİ, KURGU MU? DEEPFAKE TEKNOLOJİSİ VE DEZENFORMASYON ÇAĞI
Demir, M. (2025) · Dicle Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi · doi:10.15182/diclesosbed.1602837
Patel, K., & Karnati, M. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-13806-4_18
Választási deepfake: szabályozási kérdések, kihívások és alkotmányos dilemmák
Szikora, T. A. (2026) · Iustum Aequum Salutare · doi:10.69695/ias.2026.2.10
Daryfauzi, V., & Rizqian, B. (2026) · Jurnal Ilmu Politik dan Komunikasi · doi:10.34010/jipsi.v16i1.19835
The Impact of Super Political Action Committee Spending on Abortion Legislation in a Post-Dobbs Era
Atchley, J. (2026) · ScholarWorks (Walden University)
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
- green
- doi.org
- 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