Americans on both sides of the aisle often share views; misinformation spread by the media has only sharpened political division among the masses. Affective polarization often occurs when both sides do not fully comprehend each other’s perspective. While at times this is due to general unawareness of a party or elected official’s policy, misinformation is often spread through media sources for the purpose of intentionally misleading views in favor of a party.
California’s AB 2839 disallows the distribution of election content that is “materially deceptive.” It covers artificially adapted content that could harm a candidate, committee or elected official’s reputation and also covers voting process misrepresentation. The bill is one of California’s responses to the spread of misinformation. However, it has resulted in controversy which led it to be temporarily put on hold.
Concerns have been raised over its legality under the First Amendment. The bill is a necessary reaction to AI’s prevalence, but a failed attempt at controlling misinformation. It’s necessary to continue to look for a solution that effectively balances free speech without encroaching on 1st Amendment rights.
Intentions
AB 2839 is part of a triad of bills in California that seek to combat the explosion of AI content in view of the election.
- AB 2655: requires online platforms with over 1 million users in California to identify and remove “materially deceptive content.”
- AB 2355: requires labeling AI political ads with disclaimers to inform viewers that the content was a production of AI.
- AB 2839: the only one that includes civil remedies and injunctions against content creators and platforms who intentionally violate the rule, exempting political satire. It extends the enforcement period, which was laid out in AB 2655. Originally, content would be considered to be in violation if distributed or posted within 120 days of an election. However, this part of the bill has extended the window to include up to 60 days after.
The Court’s Decision
Governor Gavin Newsom signed the bill into law in September 2024, making it one of the strictest laws of its kind in the U.S. However, only a month later, U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez said that while AI and deepfakes are an issue, the bill violates citizens’ right to free speech. The bill has been on hold ever since. Mendez writes, “Most of AB 2839 acts as a hammer instead of a scalpel, serving as a blunt tool that hinders humorous expression and unconstitutionally stifles the free and unfettered exchange of ideas, which is so vital to American democratic debate.”
Some Avenues
An alternative to the bill is to increase public awareness of AI content and provide more education regarding their identification and protection. However, this is not a perfect solution. As AI becomes more developed and harder to spot, there is cause for concern about whether these measures are enough. Although the current bill is excessive, developing a solution could look like defining “materially deceptive” content and providing a detailed list of what is considered a violation.
The Future
AI content will only continue to grow, and with it, more avenues to manipulate voters that cause division. “Me versus them” thinking and overall toxic partisanship has reached an all-time high.
California has the right idea, however: there is a huge risk in developing a policy that will involve limiting First Amendment rights. It’s important to protect Americans rights while protecting election integrity, but neither should come at a cost to the other.
Acknowledgement: The ideas and opinions expressed in this article are those of the respective author and do not represent Our National Conversation.
