3 Whisky Happy HourThe Ricochet PodcastGLoP CultureBeyond the Polls with Henry OlsenParsing Immigration PolicyFederalist Radio HourWhat the Hell Is Going OnFreedom to LearnDaily SignalThe Erick Erickson ShowChicks on The Right3 Martini LunchThe Learning CurveThe Conservative Woman’s GuideHeritage ExplainsNot Dead YetGiving VenturesWho Funds that?The Radio Free Hillsdale HourThe Glenn ShowFirst Things PodcastCall Me Back - with Dan SenorHillsdale DialoguesLaw Talk with Epstein, Yoo & CookeThe LibertarianThe Report Card with Nat MalkusThe Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’ConnorThe American IdeaMadison’s NotesConservative Crossroads with Henry OlsenMom WarsThe Back of the BookGray MattersMartini ShotThe Dave Carter ShowThe Powerline ShowIn DissentHeard at HeritageSmart Girl PoliticsJames Lileks’ The DinerCase in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and CultureJobMakersOne on One with Robert DoarHomeschooling Journeys with Curious MikeHubwonk

Get the Ricochet app

Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

  1. Main Feed/
  2. Are Satirical Deepfake Videos Now a Crime in California?
September 19, 2024 at 11:02 AM

Are Satirical Deepfake Videos Now a Crime in California?

Brian Watt
@BrianWatt

CHARTER MEMBER

To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

Join to bookmark21likesJoin to like28comments

California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed legislation making it illegal to "with malice, knowingly distribute an advertisement or other election communication containing materially deceptive content," 120 days before an election and 60 days after. The new law generally applies to AI images and deepfake videos of politicians and treads closely, if not openly, to violating the constitutional protections for free speech and satire. As a result, The Babylon Bee has challenged the new law with, of course, a hilarious and satirical deepfake video of the perfectly coifed governor (that clearly and accurately describes his term in office).

More on the new law from Newsom’s office:

AB 2655 by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) requires large online platforms to remove or label deceptive and digitally altered or created content related to elections during specified periods, and requires them to provide mechanisms to report such content. It also authorizes candidates, elected officials, elections officials, the Attorney General, and a district attorney or city attorney to seek injunctive relief against a large online platform for noncompliance with the act.

“AI-generated deepfakes pose a clear and present risk to our elections and our democracy. AB 2655 is a first-in-the-nation solution to this growing threat, and I am grateful to Governor Newsom for signing it. Advances in AI over the last few years make it easy to generate hyper-realistic yet completely fake election-related deepfakes, but AB 2655 will ensure that online platforms minimize their impact. The new law is a win for California’s voters, and for our democracy,” said Assemblymember Berman.

…and…(emphasis mine)

AB 2839, an urgency measure by Assemblymember Gail Pellerin (D-Santa Cruz), expands the timeframe in which a committee or other entity is prohibited from knowingly distributing an advertisement or other election material containing deceptive AI-generated or manipulated content. The bill also expands the scope of existing law to prohibit materially deceptive content of elected officials, candidates, elections officials and others, authorizing them to file a civil action to enjoin the distribution of such material.

Democrats in Pennsylvania should be relieved that their state does not have a similar law, because warrants would certainly be issued for the Democrat operatives who put up bus stop signs deceptively claiming that the Philadelphia Eagles organization had endorsed Kamala Harris.

On a related note...does the omission of a candidate’s entire quotation on a given subject, in other words, manipulating a candidate’s actual content...with malice...fall under this new law? Haven’t Kamala Harris, Tim Walz, Joe Biden, and a number of other Democrat lawmakers and operatives continued to knowingly (and “with malice”) distribute election communication containing materially deceptive content about Donald Trump? Haven’t they continued to perpetuate knowingly false information that has been repeatedly debunked – even by leftist media fact-checkers like Snopes?

Don’t they continue to spread blatant falsehoods about statements and declarations that Trump has purportedly made, including the “Fine People” hoax, the “Bloodbath” smear, the “Dictator on Day One” sarcastic remark, the “Suckers and Losers” hoax, and many other blatant falsehoods – and that he will incarcerate his political enemies (irony alert) if elected? Sounds a smidge deceptive and malicious to me.

Of course, the new California law, written by Democrats in a Democrat super-majority legislature in Sacramento and signed by a Democrat governor with a long list of political career failures (see the Babylon Bee video) will never be directed to arrest fellow Democrat politicians, surrogates, supporters or other commentators who continue to perpetuate these many hoaxes and lies.

The new law is clearly designed to put the fear of arrest, prosecution, and incarceration into anyone critical, even through satire, of Democrat politicians seeking election — especially those Democrats who continue to blatantly lie — of which there are so many that one loses count.

This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet's members.

Discussion (28)

Sign in to commentSign in
  • CONTRIBUTOR

    To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Nathanael Ferguson@NathanaelFerguson·2y

    Perhaps. But only until the Supreme Court strikes down the law on 1A grounds.

  • CHARTER MEMBER

    To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Brian Watt@BrianWatt·2y
    ReplyingtoNathanael Ferguson

    Nathanael Ferguson (View Comment):

    Perhaps. But only until the Supreme Court strikes down the law on 1A grounds.

    They won't do it until there's a test case that gets elevated to the Supreme Court. A good deal of what the Babylon Bee produces could be worthy candidates.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    kedavis@kedavis·2y

    California is getting to be where it'll be easier to list what's NOT illegal.

  • CONTRIBUTOR

    To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Seawriter@Seawriter·2y

    Be interesting trying to extradite someone from Texas to California 0n this charge. Hell, to arrest someone in Texas.

  • CHARTER MEMBER

    To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Percival@Percival·2y
Scroll for later comments
+23 more comments
Join the conversation

You're seeing five of 28 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.

Trending

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

Join Ricochet

Get the Ricochet app

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play
  • •
  • •