The NAB is again addressing the proposed political AI disclosure rules for broadcasters from the FCC, saying the NPRM’s loudest supporters’ arguments are “inapposite or nonsensical,” with extra support from all state broadcasters associations.
In their reply comments, the NAB again contends that the FCC lacks statutory authority to implement such regulations and that the proposed rules would not withstand legal scrutiny under the Administrative Procedure Act or the First Amendment. The comments build on the NAB’s initial 74-page stance.
“Given the insurmountable problems stemming from its lack of legal authority, the Commission cannot hope to enact rules effectively promoting the public’s ability to assess the substance and reliability of false, deceptive, and misleading AI-generated political ads,” the NAB stated. “Only Congress can address AI-generated political deepfakes across platforms and reach the advertisers creating political ads and thus should be the entity to take the lead in considering any needed regulatory action.”
As for the rule’s supporters who say it would not violate free speech, “These same commenters’ deficient First Amendment ‘analyses’ also failed to recognize, let alone address, the proposed rules’ burdens on broadcasters, candidates, and other speakers,” the NAB stated. “In short, commenters did virtually nothing to demonstrate that the FCC’s proposals would satisfy strict, exacting, or intermediate scrutiny or even rational basis review.”
The association notes that even some supporters of the FCC’s proposals acknowledge that the scope is overly broad and problematic.
A coalition of all 50 state broadcasters associations, as well as those representing the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, also urge the agency to abandon its proposed rules. In their joint filing, they argue that the FCC’s proposals are “severely misguided,” would not achieve their intended goals, and could result in significant harm to broadcasters, advertisers, and the public.
“Adding the new education, inquiry, investigation, and disclosure requirements proposed in the NPRM would substantially increase the burden on stations,” the State Associations asserted. They emphasized that many stations operate with small staffs and are already under immense time pressure to comply with existing political advertising regulations.
They argue that focusing on the mere presence of AI in political advertisements is problematic, as AI can be used for both positive and benign purposes in ad production. “Damning a technology rather than a particular use to which it may be put is both shortsighted and harmful to the public, candidates, and, as collateral damage here, broadcasters,” they wrote.
The State Associations conclude their filing with the request, “That the Commission terminate this proceeding without adopting the proposals or any similar regulations suggested by commenters in this proceeding,” they wrote.
The FCC will review the comments submitted during the now-closed public comment period before making a decision on whether to adopt, modify, or discard the proposed rules.
