California Governor Gavin Newsom signed two new bills into law on Tuesday, aiming to crack down on the use of “deepfakes” and digital disinformation during elections.

California Governor Gavin Newsom at the Georgia TechÕs McCamish Pavilion prior to the CNN Presidential Debate between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump held at CNN’s studios in Atlanta. CNN Anchors Jake Tapper and Dana Bash are moderators of the debate.

The legislation, seen as controversial, marks a direct response to the rising influence of artificial intelligence (AI) in politics, particularly as AI-generated content becomes more prevalent in social media.

Patriotic beachwear for freedom lovers! Shop now and get 10% off with code RB10. Vet & LEO-founded.

MORE NEWS: Awkward: Kamala Harris Caught On Hot Mic During Hurricane Briefing [WATCH]

The laws, known as AB 2655 and AB 2839, specifically target politically motivated deepfakes, which are digitally altered videos or images that can portray candidates saying or doing things they never did.

The first law, AB 2655, requires major online platforms to block any “materially deceptive content” related to elections in California before and after election periods.

Who do you think will win the Presidential election in November?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from LifeZette, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.
Close

This covers AI-generated media, including deepfakes. The law defines “materially deceptive content” as audio or visual media that is altered or digitally created, a category that includes political misinformation as well.

The second law, AB 2839, more narrowly targets deepfakes of political candidates in California.

It prohibits any deepfakes that portray a candidate for federal, state, or local office as saying or doing something they never did, if it is likely to damage their reputation or harm their electoral prospects.

MORE NEWS: Donald Trump’s Election Odds Just Skyrocketed [WATCH]

There are exceptions for satire, parody, and news reporting, but these require clear disclaimers that the content is not real.

The push for these laws came after social media platform X, owned by Elon Musk, featured a deepfake parody of Vice President Kamala Harris.

The video spliced real quotes with a convincing fake voiceover, creating a false impression of her statements.

While the video was intended as satire, it stirred controversy, leading to criticism of both Musk and Newsom.

MORE NEWS: Peter Doocy Ruins KJP With Receipts Over Disaster Relief Misinformation Claim [WATCH]

In response to the legislation, Elon Musk, a frequent critic of Newsom and Democratic policies in California, sharply rebuked the governor.

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, speaks during a South by Southwest panel in Austin in 2018. SpaceX is planning a rocket engine production facility near Waco, Musk said on social media Saturday.

On his social media platform X (formerly Twitter), Musk voiced his discontent with the new law, calling Newsom “The Joker.” Musk, who has positioned himself as a free speech advocate, claims the legislation infringes on First Amendment rights.

Musk took to X on Wednesday and Thursday, sharing a series of posts accusing Newsom of attacking free speech. In one post, Musk said, “The Joker is in charge,” alongside an image of himself with a few choice words.

In another, he reposted the deepfake video of Kamala Harris that sparked the legislative action, writing, “You’re not gonna believe this, but @GavinNewsom just announced that he signed a LAW to make parody illegal, based on this video.”

MORE NEWS: Democrat Candidate Accused Of Covering Up Child Sex Abuse, Protecting The Perp [WATCH]

Musk also responded to criticism about California’s stance on content moderation, stating, “hard to be a free speech platform in a state that wants to ban free speech.”

MORE NEWS: North Carolina Sheriff Torches Biden-Harris FEMA Response, Thanks Elon Musk [WATCH]

This criticism aligns with Musk’s broader stance as he continues to market X as a free speech platform, despite numerous allegations of him being accused of manipulating the platform to promote his own content and suspending journalists who cover him critically.

While Musk has embraced his role as a defender of free speech, especially regarding the use of AI and satire in political discourse, his company X remains free to moderate content.

The recent Supreme Court ruling in NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton affirmed that social media companies retain the First Amendment right to moderate content on their platforms, giving companies like X the ability to control what is posted.

Critics of the new California laws, including Musk, argue that the legislation could stifle political speech by making it harder to create and share satirical content or memes, which have become a significant part of political commentary in the digital age.

Supporters, however, insist that the laws are necessary to prevent the spread of false and damaging information that could influence elections.

Musk’s criticisms are part of a broader feud with California’s political leadership, having previously moved X’s headquarters out of California in response to what he described as overregulation.

Musk’s X has also faced financial difficulties since his acquisition of the platform for $44 billion in 2022.

The platform stopped publishing earnings reports, but estimates suggest a sharp revenue drop of 52% in 2023, with further declines expected in 2024.

Major advertisers have pulled back from X due to Musk’s controversial posts and moderation policies, and the platform is now valued at less than half of what Musk originally paid.

The intersection of AI technology, politics, and free speech continues to fuel debate as both sides grapple with the implications of regulating digital content.

Newsom’s actions represent an effort to limit what he and other Democrats view as dangerous and misleading information in an era where AI can easily distort reality.

Musk’s response, on the other hand, reflects his belief that such regulations infringe upon the fundamental right to free speech.

As California becomes one of the first states to implement such a law, it remains to be seen how these regulations will be enforced and whether they will withstand potential First Amendment challenges.

With the 2024 presidential election fast approaching, the role of AI in politics is likely to remain a contentious issue as both lawmakers and tech leaders navigate the evolving digital landscape.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.