Bangladesh Elections Face AI-Misinformation Challenge as Polls Approach

Bangladesh’s information landscape faces an AI-driven crisis as the country prepares for its first national election following the Hasina regime’s collapse. Artificial intelligence is increasingly being weaponized to spread misinformation, threatening the foundation of democratic decision-making in an already polarized environment.

In early November, as Dhaka experienced a wave of violence including public buses being set ablaze and explosives discovered at schools, a video began circulating on social media featuring what appeared to be an officer from the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB). In the clip, the supposed officer claimed, “We have evidence that these bombs were planted by the BNP and Shibir. They are intentionally trying to put the blame on the Awami League.”

The video seemed authentic at first glance—it displayed a legitimate media outlet’s logo, featured natural speech patterns, and showed none of the typical glitches associated with synthetic media. This seamless presentation was precisely the intent: to lend credibility to a specific political narrative supporting the Awami League’s announced lockdown program.

This incident exemplifies a growing trend as Bangladesh’s interim government prepares for elections. AI-generated campaigns are becoming commonplace, with various political actors deploying artificial intelligence to shape public opinion, while the country appears ill-equipped to counter these sophisticated threats.

Democracy fundamentally relies on a shared understanding of truth, but recent advances in AI-powered video generation are eroding this foundation. Tools like Google’s Nano Banana AI and OpenAI’s Sora can now produce footage nearly indistinguishable from authentic recordings. The technological advancement has far outpaced public awareness, media literacy, and legal safeguards.

“Voter turnout will decrease, but more importantly, voter choice will be influenced. Who people decide to vote for may be shaped by AI-driven persuasion, often without voters realizing it,” warned Sumon Rahman, head of Media Studies and Journalism at the University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh, in an interview with The Business Standard.

A particularly concerning development is the emergence of a new political tactic: dismissing authentic information as “AI-generated” to undermine inconvenient evidence. This growing ambiguity threatens the very foundation of informed democratic participation, creating what Rahman describes as “a dystopian situation” where citizens struggle to verify information needed to make electoral decisions.

The scale of the problem is accelerating rapidly. Data from DismissLab reveals that between July and September, eight Bangladesh-focused fact-checkers verified 21 election-related false claims. However, in just six weeks between October 1 and November 15, that number nearly tripled to 57 debunked claims.

Qadruddin Shishir, editor of The Dissent and former fact-checker for Agence France-Presse, explains that politically motivated misinformation operates on two fronts: “Internal disinformation refers to actors within the country who are competing in the election… The other dimension is external disinformation – narratives being spread from outside the country.”

Shishir notes that factions linked to the Awami League, along with certain Indian social media users and media outlets, consistently amplify misleading narratives. When domestic and external campaigns converge, their impact becomes significantly more potent and potentially disruptive to electoral integrity.

Political parties aren’t the only sources of misinformation. As AI tools become widely accessible, ordinary citizens are also generating misleading content, sometimes without malicious intent. However, in Bangladesh’s polarized digital environment, even benign content can be weaponized.

Bangladesh faces this challenge with minimal institutional safeguards. Unlike the European Union, which mandates explicit labeling of AI-generated political content, Bangladesh has no comparable legal framework. This regulatory vacuum leaves audiences vulnerable to manipulation.

Fact-checking organizations continue to identify and debunk false content, but their reach remains limited mainly to audiences already skeptical of misinformation. Government-run fact-checking initiatives suffer from credibility issues due to public distrust of state institutions, while social media platforms’ moderation efforts are inconsistent and often delayed.

“When we talk about regulation, there are essentially two types: one concerns how the government will respond from a legal standpoint, and the other relates to how much the platforms themselves will regulate,” Shishir explained.

As Bangladesh approaches this pivotal election, the country finds itself at a critical juncture where the line between truth and fabrication grows increasingly blurred. Without a coordinated response involving government, journalists, technologists, and human rights advocates, the integrity of the democratic process itself may be at stake.