Broadcasters are criticizing a plan by the Federal Communications Commission to require disclosures on radio and television political ads made with the help of artificial intelligence. In a series of comments filed by the National Association of Broadcasters and individual companies, the industry is not only questioning the legality of the FCC adopting such a standard but how effective it will be.
“Despite the FCC’s best efforts,” says the NAB, “the reality is that the Commission cannot go it alone.” It argues the FCC doesn’t have the legal authority to compel truthful disclosures about political deepfakes across platforms in a manner that would ultimately benefit the public because stations would have no way of knowing for sure whether a political ad uses AI.
Under the proposal (MB Docket No. 24-211), the FCC is considering rules requiring every station that airs political ads to ask buyers whether their spots contain AI-generated content. Specifically, a station would have to inform the buyer, when an agreement is reached to air a political ad, that the station is required to make an on-air disclosure for any AI-generated content. Stations would also be mandated to inquire whether the ad includes AI-generated content. If yes, a disclosure will be needed.
But NAB says such a rule is too broad, since AI is today used in a variety of ways, such as to reduce background noise in a radio ad. “Generative AI is not the enemy,” it says in a filing, calling it the equivalent to the type of microphone used in the studio.
But broadcasters’ biggest concerns are with the fact that social media and online platforms would not be subject to the same rules as they would. Beyond the perceived unfairness of putting a burden on one industry but not another, the NAB says it could “distort” the ad market. “It is not difficult to conclude that if only broadcast ads require these disclosures, advertisers would think twice about placing ads with radio and TV stations,” it says.
Cox Media Group is among the groups urging the FCC to scuttle its plan. It says out of the dozens of “takedown requests” that Cox stations have received this election cycle, none have related to the use of deepfakes or any other allegedly deceptive use of AI. Cox says that shows the FCC can take more time to come up with a plan that will ensure that “unintended consequences that are antithetical to its goals” are avoided. By rushing forward, Cox says questions about legality would result in a “cloud of uncertainty” over any rules.
“Complying with the proposed requirements, meanwhile, would substantially burden local radio and TV broadcasters across the country,” Cox adds in a filing. “Worse yet, the proposed rules could drive advertisers to avoid broadcast altogether if they believe the disclosures are confusing or undercut their advertising strategy. To be clear, this will not eliminate the use of AI-generated content in political ads: it will merely drive those ads to unregulated platforms.”
Yet the FCC proposal also has its supporters. The National Hispanic Media Coalition believes the FCC has a “responsibility and obligation” to protect consumers from the “harms of AI,” such as turning off Latinos from the political process. “False and misleading content on the airwaves is particularly difficult to track and combat compared with more traditional, text-based information fraud,” NHMC says.
Several other advocacy groups say minority groups are especially at risk as recent efforts have attempted “to sow distrust and suppress turnout” among people of color. They argue that the FCC has the authority to require such disclosures. “The FCC’s sponsorship disclosure obligations have been upheld over the years and rarely challenged, as have the political programming rules,” the groups write.
But several conservative organizations think the FCC has gone too far, and that it lacks jurisdiction over AI’s use in political ads. “This proposal constitutes an overreach of the FCC’s statutory authority, exhibits arbitrariness, and threatens to severely distort political discourse through a fragmented regulatory approach,” the Heritage Foundation says.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee, which funds GOP candidate campaigns, calls the FCC proposal “misguided” and “unlawful.” It argues that not only broadcasters will be burdened, but also the political committees working to get a candidate elected.
Any rules adopted by the Commission will not impact the current election cycle. Its reply comment window is open through Oct. 11. So far, more than 2,200 individuals have weighed in on the proceeding.…Read more by
