South Carolina Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette appears distressed in a gloomy room as she undergoes a polygraph test that ends with the lie detector catching fire. Although the video clarifies that the “dramatizations” in this political ad are generated with artificial intelligence, some voters still asked her whether what they saw was real, Evette told Noticias Telemundo.

At first, Evette said she thought, “This is ridiculous, right? Like, nobody could possibly believe this?” Later, as she traveled the state during her campaign to become the Republican gubernatorial nominee — a race she lost in June to Attorney General Alan Wilson — she said she encountered voters who were confused about the video’s veracity.

“On the campaign trail, I would have people ask me, like, ‘Oh my gosh, did they really make you take a lie-detector test?’” Evette said. She then had to explain to them that it never happened and it was an AI-generated fake ad.

“So you almost think it’s a joke and you kind of laugh at it, until you realize that there is a group of people out there that can’t tell the difference,” she said, “and then start to question if what they’re saying may be true.”

Evette is not the only one whose image was manipulated in the lead-up to the midterm elections. The Wesleyan Media Project, a group of experts that tracks political propaganda in campaigns, identified at least 220 ads produced or enhanced with artificial intelligence by candidates or political action committees this election cycle. They cost just under $137 million.

It’s a significant leap in the use of this technology compared to 2024, when the investment in AI was less than $50,000 during the presidential election. As of May of this year, the money spent on these AI ads was already $20 million.

“We really saw the growth in AI ads over the summer,” Travis Ridout, a professor at Washington State University and one of the project directors, told Noticias Telemundo. “A lot of them were connected with closely fought primary races.”

The lieutenant governor of South Carolina saw two videos of herself generated with artificial intelligence, or deepfakes, but she also shared one that falsely depicted her opponent, Alan Wilson, rejecting a call from President Donald Trump. According to Evette, her campaign used artificial intelligence after the ads featuring her circulated. “But we said it, ‘This ad is AI-generated,’” she said.

The videos targeting Evette are said to have been paid for by a PAC; the one released against her opponent was funded by the lieutenant governor’s campaign. A request for comment sent to Wilson was not immediately returned.

In response to a query from Noticias Telemundo on social media, nearly 40 people said they had seen political ads generated with artificial intelligence. Some admitted that they have difficulty distinguishing them.

“And that could be deceptive; voters could be basing their decisions on falsehoods in that case,” Ridout said. “That’s, I think, what’s most concerning from a democratic perspective.”

In the absence of a federal law regulating them, the responsibility falls to local governments, said Ridout, who estimates that about 30 states have some type of rule or requirement regarding AI in political campaigns.

Of the 220 ads analyzed by the Wesleyan Media Project, only 27% revealed they used artificial intelligence tools.

The possibilities ‘are endless’

Candidates with smaller campaign budgets rely on artificial intelligence to compete with their rivals, Ridout suggested.

“I think it’s here to stay. I don’t know that it’s going to go away,” said Evette. Campaigns “are extremely expensive,” she noted, and AI reduces many recording and editing costs.

These tools could also “unlock” more creativity in political advertising, said Ridout, “which wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.”

He said the possibilities are practically endless and include satire. Among the ads he analyzed, he saw candidates emerging from a swamp, boxing against Trump, or appearing alongside physicist Albert Einstein, who died in 1955.

“I do worry about the lasting impact of those images, even if people know that it might not be true,” Ridout said. He noted those images might stick in their mind when they’re voting, or it may even generate waves of misinformation that trigger violence.

AI can “redefine” modern political campaigns, the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonprofit institute whose experts have analyzed the potential impact of this technology on democracy, said in an article.

Mekela Panditharatne, legal adviser and director of the center’s Elections and Government Program, said that without disclosure, “generative AI use in political ads has the potential to distort perceptions of candidates, painting candidates in a flattering light or their opponents in a negative light.”

During the Minnesota primaries, a deepfake circulated showing Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, smiling amid mountains of money.

A spokesperson from her office said that although it didn’t stop them from winning the primary, there was alarm over the impact of the AI-generated video. “There is already too much distrust in our politics, and voters deserve to know what’s real and what’s not,” the spokesperson said.

Minnesota is one of the states with AI regulations; in 2023, its Legislature passed with bipartisan support a ban on its use to influence elections. The AI ad targeting Flanagan elicited debate over whether it was unlawful or whether it was protected under the First Amendment.

Artificial intelligence “should never be used to manipulate voters,” Flanagan’s spokesperson stated.

A matter of transparency

At least two federal bills to regulate AI in politics are pending discussion and approval by lawmakers.

One seeks to ensure that advertisements have conspicuous notices that artificial intelligence tools have been used; the other attempts to prohibit this technology “to generate materially deceptive content falsely depicting federal candidates in political ads to influence federal elections.”

Although local regulations exist, some candidates still violate them, according to Panditharatne from the Brennan Center.

“I think those laws have not had as strong a deterrent effect as we would like,” she said, making a point for the need of a universal federal standard.

When designing any law, legislators take into account the First Amendment, which protects, among other rights, freedom of speech, religion and the press.