Addressing AI false narratives about political candidates is an expensive task, not just an ethical issue. So, who will bear the financial responsibility of suppressing AI-generated misinformation in the upcoming #2024election?
Dealing with misinformation may necessitate specialized staff with expertise in AI and media literacy, leading to new roles within the campaign structure. This could, in turn, set a new standard for evaluating campaign effectiveness.
All candidates will have to ride this wave, ready or not.
The 14th Amendment, created post-Civil War, suddenly becomes the spotlight under Trump. It disqualifies candidates engaged in insurrection, rebellion, or aiding enemies. But here’s the catch: enforcing it is a logistical nightmare. Critics exposed its flaws, yet here we are, stuck in legal limbo.
The Amendment Drip
We’ve got 27 amendments. The Bill of Rights — the first ten — were ratified like a bundled package in 1791. Break it down: 17 amendments in over 200 years.
Bug Fixes in Action. The “Undo” Buttons and the Missing Update.
- Will presidential candidates have to shift into a ‘reactive mode’ to firefight these AI manipulated narratives?
Could this need of debunking false narratives of AI-generated images and videos potentially divert the candidate from proactively discussing strategies and substantive matters?
- Are we redirecting or allocating resources that should be used to forward a candidate’s stands to damage control?
Does this diversion of resources hamper the campaign’s capability to promote the candidate’s policies, vision for governance, and stances to voters?
- Voters ‘information fatigue’.
The presence of both real and fake information can create a confusing media landscape that requires extra effort from voters to discern truth from falsehood. Could this lead to “information fatigue,” where people become less diligent in their scrutiny of facts.