In a rule-making decision advanced along a 3-2 party-line split last week, the Federal Communications Commission is considering rules to require the disclosure of any radio or TV ad using artificial intelligence in its creation. Lost so far in the conversation is the AI police-like role that every broadcast station will need to take on when approaching political advertisers.
“Notably, we are not proposing to ban or restrict the use of AI-generated content in producing political ads,” says the Federal Communications Commission’s proposal.
Under the proposal (MB Docket No. 24-211) now open for public comment, the FCC is considering rules that would require every station that airs political ads to ask buyers whether their spots contain any AI-generated content.
“If the voices and images we see in political ads are altered by AI, the public should know that,” FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel said. “For political ads on television and radio, the FCC’s new disclosure rules would make sure that they will.”
Specifically, a station would be required to inform the buyer, at the time an agreement is reached to air a political ad, that the station is required to make an on-air disclosure for any political ad that includes such AI-generated content. Stations would also be mandated to inquire whether the ad includes AI-generated content. If yes, a disclosure will be needed.
“The station would be required to make the on-air announcement immediately preceding or during the broadcast of any ad by or on behalf of a legally qualified candidate for public office and any issue ad that contains AI-generated content,” the proposal says. The FCC is also considering whether disclosures could air immediately following the ad.
For radio ads, the FCC proposes an on-air announcement in a “voice that is clear, conspicuous, and a speed that is understandable.” The proposed disclosure for radio ads would state that, “The following message contains information generated in whole or in part by artificial intelligence.”
The FCC also proposes to require that stations include in their online political files a notice disclosing the use of AI-generated content for each political ad using the same standardized language as used on-air.
“We believe that this requirement would help to foster greater transparency regarding the use of AI-generated content in political ads by, for example, allowing listeners, viewers, and other interested parties to confirm which ads aired by a station contained AI-generated content,” the proposal says.
The FCC says the proposal is about transparency, but the rulemaking — which ironically was voted on behind closed doors July 10 — still has several unanswered questions. They include how stations will need to respond if the buyer fails to respond to their request, and what should happen if the station is alerted by a third party about alleged use of AI. The FCC has not yet concluded that broadcasters must refuse the buy, something that stations would be unable to do for federal candidates under current law. Other issues that remain undecided is whether to require the disclosures in English or the language of the commercial, or both.
The FCC is also considering whether to cast a wider net and apply the requirements to candidate and issue ads embedded within syndicated or network programming. It acknowledges in those situations that the station wouldn’t have direct contact with ad buyers. One idea is to require stations to ask syndicators and networks if their programming has any ads that use AI-generated content.
Broadcasters ‘Already Burdened’
Commissioner Brendan Carr, who calls the idea a “recipe for chaos,” especially since it is so close to an election, says the plan to potentially fine stations for not airing disclosures is at odds with federal law that says stations cannot refuse the sale of airtime to federal candidates, even if the spot defames other candidates.
“If today’s FCC intends for stations to deny candidates access for failure to reveal the scope and scale of AI-generated content, it is not clear how the Communications Act would permit it,” Carr said.
Commissioner Nathan Simington, who also dissented, said broadcasters are “already burdened” with regulatory compliance requirements, and this proposal would only make matters worse. He also thinks it could send some buyers to other media.
“I don’t think political spend on broadcast will decline as a result of these new requirements. But what these requirements do is provide yet another small reason to shift programming to online and streaming platforms and away from the regulated space of broadcast,” Simington said. “That secular trend is happening anyway, and I don’t think the occasion warrants additional burden.”
Comments