171
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2025
171 points (100.0% liked)
News
31781 readers
2135 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
And which is painfully obviously satire, even if it's stupid and mean.
Satire is protected speech for a reason.
There are better ways to fight this than giving Republicans even more tools to censor their critics.
That South Park deepfake ad dogging Donald Trump that everyone loves so much would technically be illegal under her proposed rules as well.
Deepfakes are a real problem, but this is a stupid, short-sighted solution.
The deepfake puts it into murky waters for me.
If you have an actor who is obviously not the person represented saying a bunch of stupid and mean shit, I’ll defend your right to do it while also calling you a worthless piece of shit for thinking something so mean and petty is funny. This is basically the MadTV model and it has a right to exist for sure.
Deepfakes feel different. The ridiculous realism casts it in a light that feels a lot more like misinformation, which I do not believe is defensible, in the same way yelling fire in a crowded theater isn’t defensible.
I’m not saying it should be banned, but I guess I’m more open to like a serious and healthy debate over it.
Luckily this video is over the top. If that script is a bit more subtle, with a more serious tone, saying stuff that has a different message but in a way that she would typically phrase it, they could have her promoting fascist or nazi messages just as easily. She would have to start denying every video that was ever made about her.
Its not okay. Never will be.
Its not satire at that point. Its impersonating a representative of the people and spreading a message of hate that she wouldn't support in real life. Not saying it has happened yet, but it could have just as easily been done.
Do we get ahead of it now? Or wait until you cant tell whats real or fake?
We should be getting ahead of it, just not in the particular way that Klobuchar wants it handled, at least not in the circumstances we currently find ourselves in.
Look, we literally have fascists in charge and they will abuse her proposed legislation as a tool to silence real criticism. She's suggesting handing them the proverbial keys to shut down real satire speaking real truth to power. These are already lawless fascists, but they love to hide behind the idea of law, and laws like this that they can abuse to shut down dissent are their favorite kind.
Maybe a law like this could fly if we weren't in a cold civil war, but right now it's foolhardy because the people with the most power aren't reasonable people and will abuse this to silence criticism.
Wouldn't this just stop deep fake satire? What does banning deep fakes do to completely ban satire?
Well what do we do then?
Well first we have to disabuse ourselves of the notion that "law" is going to save us in the circumstances where the lawless have taken hold of every lever of power in government.
While we shouldn't be descending into outright anarchy, it's obvious the law isn't going to save us and even Gavin Newsom is only doing something half-hearted. He's not going balls-to-the-wall and saying "look we literally have fascists in charge, it's time to do the unsavory to take the power back and hold them accountable, and that means ignoring the law as much as they do." He's proposing doing what the other side is doing but only if they actually do it. Unfortunately, to win against the lawless, you must become lawless yourself. Taking the high road has done nothing but get us deeper and deeper into this mess, and we're past the point of no return. The time to handle this was by putting war criminals like Bush and Cheney in the Hague, or even further back, Ronald Reagan and Oliver North being taken to trial for Iran Contra. We no longer have the option of just trusting the law to sort things out. The other options we haven't aren't easy, but the most non-violent of them is a national strike, and a national strike will require groups to have first built parallel systems to support one another during a strike. Nobody is out here building parallel systems or getting organized to fight this in the only ways we can. I don't know what to tell you about what else we can do, I'm not some master tactician in a crumbling society on the verge of outright civil war, but pretending that we can trust in the law when the lawless are in charge is foolish and naive.
Perhaps that’s why they made it over the top. Literally everything anyone does can be turned into “if they had done this instead it would be illegal”
Right now it's just a random video floating around the Internet, but what happens when videos like this end up in campaign ads, smearing a candidate with false statements or behaviors? Or get used to force a candidate out of office? With a little subtlety, and the ability to suppress the MAGA inclination to exaggerate, videos like this could keep candidates tied up explaining themselves and defending themselves, instead of effectively campaigning. And we all know which party is most likely to employ this strategy, even though they'll blame the other.
On the other hand, a poorly behaved candidate can simply wave off a genuine video as a deep fake, and their followers will believe it. If Boobert's gropey date video were released today, she'd probably claim it was fake. Why not float that excuse? There's no downside in making the claim, and perhaps they actually get away with it with their own supporters.