A senior Trump advisor shared a video that seems to show an NBC reporter badmouthing Republican presidential candidates. It appears AI was used to imitate the reporter’s voice.

88 points

Don’t demand. Sue.

permalink
report
reply
68 points

First demand, then sue. Can’t get the suit to court if you can’t show that you tried asking first.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points
*

Also, even if you’re suing - litigation can take months/years. But the damage is done instantly. I don’t think there’s an easy solution here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

There’s a quote for everything, almost like we’ve been through exactly this before…

“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Easy solution is for People to stop being such utter idiots. So, you are correct, never happening.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

You can, the main difference is that if they refuse you can prove stuff like intent to demand higher damages

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That’s not true. You don’t have to ask someone to stop committing defamation before suing them for defamation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-39 points

For what??? Lmfao.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points
*

Defamation, slander, libel, something along those lines.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-31 points

This isn’t any of those things. Also good luck proving it in court. Onus is on the reporter here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Damages to their reputation as a professional? Which would lead to loss in viewers, which would lead to loss in advertising revenue, which can be a LOT of money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-26 points

Prove it in court. Go look up how successful these cases are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
62 points

The video in question, shared by a top Trump adviser, opens with authentic footage of NBC News senior Capitol Hill correspondent Garrett Haake previewing the debate for the network. It soon cuts to video of each candidate as a voiceover — in Haake’s voice — makes disparaging comments about the candidates.

“This is Ron DeSantis: An establishment RINO that wears insoles in order to look taller,” the voiceover says. “And this is Nikki Haley: Nobody really gives a shit about Nikki Haley.”

I guarantee you there are a significant number of Trump fans to whom it wouldn’t even occur that an NBC news correspondent wouldn’t intentionally say ‘shit’ on a national news broadcast.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Yep. The teabaggers are not really known for being all that sentient.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
reply
46 points

It will be interesting what this form of yellow journalism will look like in a few short years…

permalink
report
reply
29 points

I have a feeling it will be quick and nasty. Deep fakes aren’t just behind a door, it’s a floodgate waiting to be opened.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

Also works both ways making it even worse. Actually catch someone saying something abhorrent on a hot mic? It was AI, I swear.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Not sure if it’s an even fight. There’s actual video of Trump saying any number of disgusting (or even non-republican things, like that time he proposed to take people’s guns without due process), and it’s not affecting his support.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

works both ways

No way. On one side you have a crazed cult of emotionally driven, “poorly educated”, violent dolts who refuse the truth while seeking any possible outrage against their non-crazy “enemies”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Here is the video. It is actually pretty funny. I hate Trump as much as the next lemming, but this really is an obvious parody once you watch the whole video. I think NBC is complaining not because of the parody, but because the fake voice-over is too good and sets a bad precedent. It shows how good the tech is and how it could be used more subtly to create fake news (not that there aren’t already many ways to do that).

https://x.com/lacivitac/status/1722390782387089643?s=46&t=a3ohj6oncFjZ8uOAQMEdJg

permalink
report
reply
20 points

It’s not really that obvious that it’s a parody. You’re right about the voice-over being too good and it’s a very very dangerous precedent.

I’m actually really worried about the complete inability for viewers of media to know what’s real and what’s fake given how good the tech is. I know not to trust almost anything on the internet, but so many people don’t know that.

There’s probably a good case for NBC to sue over this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Exactly. This isn’t about hating Trump, it’s about a potentially powerful tool becoming basically free, with the potential to ruin the ability to trust our own eyes and ears.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

While the wilfully ignorant majority believe everything they see and hear. Which is why it was done in the first place.

“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.” Etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

I laughed, at first, but now I simply feel fear for the future where anything could be a lie. And if everything’s a lie, nothing is the truth. Much of the world stands in a terrifying post-truth political reality as AI begins to take off to enable it.

When nothing is true, anything is possible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I have that same feeling in my gut. I imagine we’ll need to create AI to find and counter the AI being used to create the fake news? It feels like an arms race that could escalate quickly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Truth vs Disinformation in the social media age is a war that will always favor the liar.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Agreed. It’s clearly intended to be funny. The fact that people are losing their minds about this and think it should be legally actionable are a) wrong, and b) terrifying me, because this is clearly parody and protected by the first amendment. I hate Trump too, but that doesn’t mean we should seek to set legal precedent that limits the ability of people to make fun of the political process. Sheesh. That goes nowhere good.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 453K

    Comments