Massachusetts Considers Ban on Deceptive AI-Generated Content in Elections

As artificial intelligence technology rapidly advances, Massachusetts lawmakers are taking bold steps to combat the growing threat of AI-generated disinformation in elections. A new bill titled the “Act to Protect Against Election Misinformation” aims to prohibit deceptive synthetic media that could undermine voter trust and democratic processes.

The proposed legislation would ban the distribution of materially deceptive election-related communications within 90 days of an election. Unlike approaches in other states that merely require disclosure of AI-generated content, Massachusetts seeks to address the issue more comprehensively by prohibiting deceptive AI-generated election ads entirely.

“We’re already seeing these deepfake political ads in Massachusetts,” notes a state election official familiar with the bill. This month, Republican gubernatorial candidate Brian Shortsleeve reportedly used a deepfake video featuring Democratic Governor Maura Healey, highlighting the immediacy of the concern.

The bill specifically targets verifiably false information regarding election dates, voting requirements, registration methods, deadlines, and falsified endorsements of candidates or ballot initiatives. It would empower individuals harmed by such deceptive content to seek legal remedies against those responsible for its distribution.

AI systems have grown sophisticated enough to produce highly realistic synthetic content at scale, increasing the risk of disinformation campaigns that average voters might struggle to identify as fake. In previous U.S. elections, AI has been used to impersonate candidates, falsely encourage voters to skip elections, or alter candidates’ statements.

Election integrity experts point to the bill’s strengths, particularly how it balances free speech concerns with voter protection. The legislation explicitly exempts satire and parody from its definition of deceptive communications, addressing potential First Amendment tensions.

“This approach recognizes that waiting to fact-check misinformation after it spreads is often too little, too late,” explains Dr. Maria Chen, a digital policy researcher at Boston University. “By the time false information is identified and corrected, many voters may have already been influenced.”

Critics of the bill, including the R Street Institute, argue that the legislation represents government overreach. They suggest a more hands-off approach where authorities would simply provide factual information proactively and intervene only when false information appears.

Proponents counter that such reactive strategies make unrealistic assumptions about how information spreads during elections. They note three key flaws in the opposition’s reasoning: assuming fact-checks will reach all citizens, believing disinformation can be fully detected and corrected in time, and expecting voters to immediately process and accept corrected information.

“Waiting until after deceptive content spreads puts the entire burden on voters to distinguish truth from fiction,” says electoral systems analyst James Wilson. “In today’s high-speed information environment, that’s simply not realistic.”

The Massachusetts bill comes amid growing global concern about AI’s impact on democratic processes. Several other states and countries are considering similar measures as AI-generated content becomes increasingly difficult to distinguish from authentic material.

The legislation’s supporters emphasize that protecting election integrity isn’t partisan—it’s about maintaining the foundation of democratic participation. With the 2024 election cycle approaching, the urgency of addressing AI-enabled disinformation continues to grow.

“At its core, this is about ensuring voters can make decisions based on accurate information,” says election law attorney Sarah Johnson. “Without that, the entire democratic process is compromised.”

If passed, Massachusetts would establish one of the strongest legal frameworks in the nation for combating AI-generated election disinformation, potentially setting a precedent for federal legislation on the issue.