The FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would mandate clear disclosures from broadcasters when using artificial intelligence in political ads on radio and TV has been stirring both sides of Capitol Hill. Now that divide appears to have gone mainstream.
With hundreds of comments from individuals spurred on by citizen groups already filed under NPRM 24-211, the FCC posted more than 800 comments received on August 25 and 26, with the vast majority in support of regulating AI in political ads.
Many consisted of the same form letter, “I support the FCC’s proposal to regulate deepfakes and AI, to create more clarity and understanding for listeners and viewers of content, especially when it comes to our elections,” but some were uniquely drafted and submitted like that of Thomas Daughton.
Daughton wrote, “As a Foreign Service employee of the U.S. Department of State over the course of three decades, I worked in a number of countries in which information was systematically manipulated as a means of controlling the outcome of elections. That experience taught me that the availability of trustworthy information is crucial to the function of a healthy democracy.”
“Given the rapidity with which AI technology is developing, Congress is unable to legislate effectively to provide guardrails on that technology’s use in the political arena. Regulatory action is therefore vital.”
The majority of comments posted before the 26th are in opposition to the NPRM, with more form-letter-style posts in variations of, “The useless definition of AI in the proposed rule (“an image, audio, or video that has been generated using computational technology or other machine-based system that depicts an individual’s appearance, speech, or conduct, or an event, circumstance, or situation”) could be applied to literally any modern political ad, creating an opening for censorship and manipulation. The FCC has no statutory authority to police the content of political advertising.”
This comes after the FCC Media Bureau granted a partial extension on the deadlines for comments and replies following a joint petition by the NAB and the Motion Picture Association. Both organizations sought more time to address the complex issues raised by the proposed rules.
Initially set for September 4 and 19, the new deadlines are now September 19 for comments and October 11 for replies, meaning there will likely be hundreds more, with major broadcast groups yet to formally weigh in.
