Brazil’s struggles with generally speaking, “election integrity” and censorship associated with a particular frame of political mind – and so, trying to suppress voices opposed to the country’s dominant political centers, look set to continue.
The country’s Superior Electoral Court, and its powerful president, Alexandre de Moraes (who is also a Supreme Court judge), have mandated more rules around elections, this time focused on the use of “AI.”
These are now tied to anything from “hate speech” and “disinformation” to stripping people running for office of their candidacy – or of their mandate, if they had already been elected.
The latter scenario would happen if a candidate who has been elected is found to have used deep fakes, or if it is decided they had spread “fake news.”
It’s crucial how the court defines deep fakes and fake news. The former, namely, is ALL synthetically generated audio/video that “creates, replaces or alters” living or dead persons’ image and/or voice – but also that of “fictitious persons.”
So anyone thinking about using 21-century techniques to convey humor or sarcasm over there – forget about it.
The Brazilian press says the court has imposed a total ban on deep fakes of any kind in the context of elections, while campaigns are under obligation to attach warning labels to other forms of AI-related content.
All of this is categorized as electoral propaganda, and applies even to material such as videos and photos where AI has been used, but which happen to be “neutral” in terms of messaging.
After the contentious general elections, that included choosing Brazil’s new president in 2022, this fall, voters will go to the polls to pick mayors and city councilors, and this is what’s prompting the Superior Electoral Court to act.
Moraes is happy with the outcome, touting the new regulation as “the most modern in the world” when it comes to what he calls “the illicit use of AI.”
Other than political candidates, this also concerns tech companies, those with the most influence such as Google and Meta and their platforms.
They are under obligation to “immediately remove” any content that is deemed to contain disinformation, hate speech, or is promoting Nazism, fascism, racism, homophobia, or is – (and what a vague term this is, wide open to subjective interpretation) – “anti-democratic.”
Reports quote the court as stating that these platforms have to “adopt and publicize measures to prevent or reduce the circulation of ‘notoriously untrue or seriously out of context’ facts that affect the integrity of the electoral process.”
Plus – “There is also a need for platforms to promote, free of charge, content that informs or clarifies untrue facts.”
