Missouri House gives initial approval to bill banning political deepfakes

By Missouri Independent via My Courier-Tribune

A bill to protect politicians from “deepfake” images and recordings received broad bipartisan support Wednesday in the Missouri House.

State Rep. Ben Baker’s bill would prohibit the distribution of digitally created or manipulated messages that “create a realistic but false image” without labeling it as being created using artificial intelligence.

The penalty would be up to six months in jail, with increased penalties if the intent is to incite violence or bodily harm and for repeat offenders. The bill also grants targets of fake, deceptive videos the right to sue the creators.

The bill passed on a voice vote. A final roll call vote is required to send it to the Missouri Senate.

The issue, Baker said, is that deepfakes have advanced so far that the average person cannot tell it is not real.

“They can make a video look and sound just like that person saying something that they didn’t say or doing something they didn’t do, and then use that to campaign in a negative way against them, which I think is purposely deceiving voters,” said Baker, a Neosho Republican.

So far, there are no known instances of deepfake videos being used in Missouri political campaigns. But experts have warned for years that manipulated content is coming, and earlier this year deepfake videos depicting Taylor Swift in sexual situations were circulated online.

A bill to ban sexually explicit deepfake videos was heard Tuesday in a House committee but no vote was taken.

Under Baker’s bill, artificially generated images or audio that include a “deceptive and fraudulent deep fake of a candidate or party” could not be used within 90 days of an election without labeling. The bill exempts news reporting about the deepfakes from penalties and broadcasters who accept an ad created using deepfake technology.

The bill would also exempt content that constitutes satire or parody. Bills intended to regulate the use of deepfakes in elections are pending in 36 states, according to the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. Six states have enacted laws regulating deep fakes, with New Mexico being the most recent.

In another section, the bill also goes after the deceptive use of telephone numbers, known as spoofing. The bill would impose criminal penalties on any marketer who transmits “misleading or inaccurate caller identification information” intended to deceive, defraud or harass the recipient.

Supporters of the bill said they welcomed its protections but some worried it didn’t go far enough.

“Why just 90 days before an election?” asked state Rep. Peter Merideth, a St. Louis Democrat. “We’ve got year-long campaigns now and longer. It should just be kind of illegal anytime you do it.”

Baker said he was willing to consider a change to lengthen the time covered by the bill but added that his original idea was to focus on the period near an election when it would be harder to respond.

Members who were skeptical of the bill worried it would intrude on protected political speech. Many negative ads use manipulated photos or loose interpretations of an opponent’s position, said state Rep. Tony Lovasco, an O’Fallon Republican.

“If I photoshop a picture of you standing next to Nancy Pelosi or something and there’s a little word bubble of some random thing that approximates something that you said on the floor, or whatnot, there’s nothing factually inaccurate depicted but it’s very clearly something that didn’t happen,” Lovasco said.

The idea is not to make negative advertising about an opponent a criminal offense, Baker said.

“I don’t want to prevent negative ads,” Baker said. “I just specifically want to try to address the deepfake videos and audio that is depicting someone to be saying something or doing something that is not…that’s just not reality.”

Lovasco remained skeptical.

“How do we draw the line between what is a political opinion about someone’s conduct versus an objective fact,” he asked.

The advances of technology make deepfakes substantially different from other forms of negative advertising, said state Rep. Doug Richey, an Excelsior Springs Republican.

People are more likely to believe a video or photograph is a real-life depiction than they are reading false information, Richey said.

“Print is becoming one of those issues where it has less of an effect on people,” Richey said. “But man, you show them a picture, an image, a little video clip, and that it’s reality to them.”