How Deep is Your Fake?

 

“I’m worried as we move closer to the election, this is going to explode… It’s going to get much worse than it is now.”

Emilio Ferrara, computer science professor at USC Viterbi School of Engineering.

Who knew that Taylor Swift, with all those Swifties, was a major supporter of Donald Trump? I mean there was a picture of Ms Swift, in a patriotic pose wearing an Uncle Sam outfit, seeming to endorse Donald Trump for President. “Taylor Wants You To Vote For Donald Trump,” purportedly says Swift. Wow! Who knew? And that photo above makes a pretty strong impression. But neither were remotely true.

Artificial intelligence can put words in anyone’s mouth, and with a few perfectly designed strokes of the keyboard, can add very credible images to boot. Old hat these days, but increasingly user-friendly AI software puts the power to create these “deep fakes” into the hands of anyone who cares to apply them.

It may have accelerated with motion pictures like Avatar and other special effects productions, but the now ubiquitous basic (simple version) technology puts this AI computing power in the hands of a lot of people… some of whom cleverly post a small disclaimer somewhere on the “fake” post. “Amid the surging interest in OpenAI, the maker of popular generative AI tool ChatGPT, tech companies are encouraging people to use new AI tools that can generate text, images and videos.” Queenie Wong and Wendy Lee for the August 21st Los Angeles Times.

Indeed, we’ve seen even some early fakes using Barack Obama’s voice and image years ago, but today, it’s literally everywhere. As for that Swift-as-Uncle-Sam post, “Over the weekend [mid-August], Trump amplified the lie when he shared the image along with others depicting support from Swift fans to his 7.6 million followers on his social network, Truth Social.

“Deception has long played a part in politics, but the rise of artificial intelligence tools that allow people to rapidly generate fake images or videos by typing out a phrase adds another complex layer to a familiar problem on social media. Known as deepfakes, these digitally altered images and videos can make it appear someone is saying or doing something they aren’t… As the race between Trump and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris intensifies, disinformation experts are sounding the alarm about generative AI’s risks…

“Platforms such as Facebook and X have rules against manipulated images, audio and videos, but they’ve struggled to enforce these policies as AI-generated content floods the internet. Faced with accusations they’re censoring political speech, they’ve focused more on labeling content and fact-checking, rather than pulling posts down. And there are exceptions to the rules, such as satire, that allow people to create and share fake images online.

“‘We have all the problems of the past, all the myths and disagreements and general stupidity, that we’ve been dealing with for 10 years,’ said Hany Farid, a UC Berkeley professor who focuses on misinformation and digital forensics. ‘Now we have it being supercharged with generative AI and we are really, really partisan.’… Farid, who analyzed the Swift images that Trump shared, said they appear to be a mix of both real and fake images, a ‘devious’ way to push out misleading content… ‘People share fake images for various reasons. They might be doing it to just go viral on social media or troll others. Visual imagery is a powerful part of propaganda, warping people’s views on politics including about the legitimacy of the 2024 presidential election, he said.

“On X, images that appear to be AI-generated depict Swift hugging Trump, holding his hand or singing a duet as the Republican strums a guitar. Social media users have also used other methods to falsely claim Swift endorsed Trump… X labeled one video that falsely claimed Swift endorsed Trump as ‘manipulated media.’ The video, posted in February, uses footage of Swift at the 2024 Grammys and makes it appear as if she’s holding a sign that says, ‘Trump Won. Democrats Cheated!’”

The problem, of course, is the sheer volume of such fakes… and the near impossibility of tracking them all. The problem is compounded by those using the First Amendment and the “safe harbor” for intermediary platforms, under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, as shields against liability. Sure, there can be “take down” notices and the underlying poster may have individual liability, but good luck finding and tracking it all. Even when those take down notice are sent, by the time the fake is removed, the damage has already been done. These fakes undermine the elections themselves, for example, as fuel for another possible Trump claim that the whole election was rigged. The harsh reality that without holding the platforms more responsible for their content, this issue is spiraling out of control.

But even where fakery is not at issue, using music from songwriters and performers with strong political beliefs, in support of political campaigns for people they oppose, is making news. Mike Gavin, writing for NBC News on August 21st, asks: “From Celine Dion to Kid Rock, can political rallies use music without the artist's permission?... Just as a politician might not listen to the music of an artist they aren't a fan of, musicians might not want their work used by a political party they aren't affiliated with.

“In many cases, campaign organizers pay an annual fee to obtain a blanket license from performance rights organizations to play or perform any work within a rightsholder's entire catalog… ‘The campaign will use it for live performances only, which means when they're outside somewhere or they're in an arena where they're just gonna put out the song live, no one's recording it, it's not being simulcast, it's not being streamed, none of that,’ said Kenneth Freundlich, a business, entertainment and intellectual property attorney ‘That implicates only one right… You do not need to license the master recording of the song for a live performance only. So, what would normally happen is when you go to a concert, the venues themselves get what's called a blanket license from the performance rights organizations.’… But even with that license, an artist or license holder can still object. So, campaign organizers often just press play on a song and hope it doesn't anger those holding the rights to it.”

It’s getting to the point where radical followers accept as truth that the fake and underlying music are both accurate and evidence of support for the candidate or issue in question. They just cannot “unsee” or “unhear” those snippets even if they contain disclaimers or have been taken down as false. This plague is beginning to infect our election process big time.

I’m Peter Dekom, and how much easier is it to question election integrity or cry “stolen election” where so much of what we see and hear is indeed fake, subconsciously manipulative and/or pervasive?