Trump's AI-Generated Crowd Photo Sparks Debate on Misinformation and Public Trust

Trump's crowd-photo claims speed AI-driven truth decay

Why it matters: AI's greatest danger, many experts in the field argue, isn't that it can be used to manufacture falsehoods -- but that its very existence makes it so easy to undermine the truth. Catch up quick: Trump posted a message on Truth Social Sunday claiming that photos showing Vice President Kamala Harris meeting a large crowd of supporters on a Detroit runway were doctored. Reality check: Many people have affirmed they were there and saw the crowds. Many of those people took their own photos. Trump, who has long been obsessed with the size of his own and his rivals' crowds, noted that there were no people reflected on the metallic sides of the Vice President's plane. The big picture: You don't need AI to alter a photo -- Photoshop has been doing that for decades. Between the lines: Warnings about the danger of deepfakes have helped arm the public against an expected flood of fakery. Some Jan. 6 defendants tried to argue that photos showing them attacking the U.S. Capitol were AI-generated fakes, invoking what a recent American Bar Association Journal article calls "the deepfake defense." Our thought bubble: Skepticism and doubt advance the truth only when everyone involved is acting in good faith. The bottom line: As Yale historian Timothy Snyder, author of "On Tyranny," puts it, "What authoritarians do is they say, 'Look, there's no truth at all. Sure you don't trust me -- but don't trust them, or them, or certainly not the media. Don't trust anybody.'"

The problem is not AI. It's the disbelief created by Donald Trump.

Fake AI imagery is a challenging problem, and not simply because it looks realistic. The key issue is that these images muddy the waters of credibility for everyone, while providing a handy excuse for political operatives willing to lie to their supporters already eager to believe the lie. Take Donald Trump's social media post on Sunday, in which he accused the Kamala Harris campaign of manipulating an image to make her crowd seem bigger at a Detroit airplane hangar last week.Current AI technologies have become surprisingly good at creating realistic images and video, unleashing fears that fake images can be used for political and election manipulation. Well, yes and no. Fake AI imagery is a challenging problem, and not simply because it looks realistic. The key issue is that these images muddy the waters of credibility for everyone, while providing a handy excuse for political operatives willing to lie to their supporters already eager to believe the lie. Take Donald Trump's social media post on Sunday, in which he accused the Kamala Harris campaign of manipulating an image to make her crowd seem bigger at a Detroit airplane hangar last week. "Has anyone noticed that Kamala CHEATED at the airport?" he wrote. "There was nobody at the plane, and she 'A.I.'d' it, and showed a massive 'crowd' of so-called followers, BUT THEY DIDN'T EXIST!" How do we know an image is real in this day and age? An average person can no longer be certain of the authenticity of images -- or increasingly even videos -- through individual sleuthing. The AI is that good, and getting better. (That's why the classic media literacy advice -- do your own research -- doesn't work anymore). This makes it difficult to know what to believe, except through a key mechanism: Trusting sources, and trusting that they have either taken the image or video themselves, or carefully vetted it as authentic. That's how we do know that the crowd waiting for Harris is real, because there are pictures from photo agencies like Getty, as well as images and reports from multiple other news organizations that were on the tarmac, that match the circulating social media photos that caught Trump's ire. We know that credible news organizations and photo agencies have very strict rules about images and videos. But that, in turn, requires trusting the photo agency -- or the media source -- furnishing the image or video. It's no accident that Trump has made it a habit to portray credible news organizations as untrustworthy liars, and many of his supporters seem to have internalized that message they were open to in the first place. Once trust is lost and all credibility is questioned, the lie doesn't have to be high quality. It doesn't have to be supported by highly realistic fake AI. It doesn't have to be so easily disprovable. To work, the lie just needs a willing purveyor and an eager audience. The AI, then, is but a fig leaf.

Opinion | The Problem Is Not A.I. It's the Disbelief Created by Trump.

Current A.I. technologies have become surprisingly good at creating realistic images and video, unleashing fears that fake images can be used for political and election manipulation. Well, yes and no. Fake A.I. imagery is a challenging problem, and not simply because it looks realistic. The key issue is that these images muddy the waters of credibility for everyone, while providing a handy excuse for political operatives willing to lie to their supporters already eager to believe the lie. Take Donald Trump's social media post on Sunday, in which he accused the Kamala Harris campaign of manipulating an image to make her crowd seem bigger at a Detroit airplane hangar last week. "Has anyone noticed that Kamala CHEATED at the airport?" he wrote. "There was nobody at the plane, and she 'A.I.'d' it, and showed a massive 'crowd' of so-called followers, BUT THEY DIDN'T EXIST!" How do we know an image is real in this day and age? An average person can no longer be certain of the authenticity of images -- or increasingly even videos -- through individual sleuthing. The A.I. is that good, and getting better. (That's why the classic media literacy advice -- do your own research -- doesn't work anymore). This makes it difficult to know what to believe, except through a key mechanism: Trusting sources, and trusting that they have either taken the image or video themselves, or carefully vetted it as authentic. That's how we do know that the crowd waiting for Harris is real, because there are pictures from photo agencies like Getty, as well as images and reports from multiple other news organizations that were on the tarmac, that match the circulating social media photos that caught Trump's ire. We know that credible news organizations and photo agencies have very strict rules about images and videos. But that, in turn, requires trusting the photo agency -- or the media source -- furnishing the image or video. It's no accident that Trump has made it a habit to portray credible news organizations as untrustworthy liars, and many of his supporters seem to have internalized that message they were open to in the first place. Once trust is lost and all credibility is questioned, the lie doesn't have to be high quality. It doesn't have to be supported by highly realistic fake A.I. It doesn't have to be so easily disprovable. To work, the lie just needs a willing purveyor and an eager audience. The A.I., then, is but a fig leaf.

Trump blames Harris' crowds on AI, so let's all assume everything we don't like is fake!

Some might view such a demonstrably false and paranoid statement from a man running for president as 'disturbing' or 'the unchecked ramblings of a doddering old fool.' And they would be correct. Former president and "man ever-so-loosely tethered to reality" Donald Trump has given us all a gift ‒ the gift of make-believe. Frustrated by the fact that Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris has been drawing large and enthusiastic rally crowds, Trump did the sensible thing Sunday and denied that any of those crowds are real. Referring to a recent airport rally Harris had in Michigan, Trump posted on social media: "Has anyone noticed that Kamala CHEATED at the airport? There was nobody at the plane, and she 'A.I.'d' it, and showed a massive 'crowd' of so-called followers, BUT THEY DIDN'T EXIST!" Some might view such a demonstrably false and paranoid statement from a man running for president as "disturbing," "a deal-breaker" or "the unchecked ramblings of a doddering old fool." And they would be correct, though I'd like to point out one important caveat: Blaming anything you don't like on artificial intelligence so you can pretend it doesn't exist is a FANTASTIC IDEA. Trump's unhinged whining reached new highs with AI conspiracy theory Trump's allegation that Harris is somehow digitally creating the actual human beings showing up en masse to her events continued in the tone of a whiny child: "She's a CHEATER. She had NOBODY waiting, and the 'crowd' looked like 10,000 people! Same thing is happening with her fake 'crowds' at her speeches. This is the way the Democrats win Elections, by CHEATING ‒ And they're even worse at the Ballot Box. She should be disqualified because the creation of a fake image is ELECTION INTERFERENCE. Anyone who does that will cheat at ANYTHING!" To drive the point home later on Sunday, he posted: "EVERYTHING ABOUT KAMALA IS FAKE!" FANTASTIC! I mean ... crazy. Definitely not the sort of thing you want to hear from someone running to be the leader of the free world and the person in charge of the U.S. nuclear codes. But in terms of dealing with the things in life we don't like, it's a solid approach. Here are some examples: Perhaps we can all use Trump's approach and blame AI for things we hate Bummed you got a speeding ticket? THAT WASN'T A COP, IT WAS AI! I'VE BEEN FRAMED, AND THE POLICE ARE CHEATING! Envious of your neighbor's new BMW? THAT'S A HYUNDAI TUCSON, AND HE'S USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A LUXURY CAR! Trump has lost it:Has Harris finally broken Trump? He's flailing, glitching and running scared. Sad that the neighbors didn't invite you to a huge pool party they held? THE STEVENSONS AI'd IT SO IT LOOKED LIKE DOZENS OF PEOPLE HAVING FUN, BUT THEY DIDN'T EXIST! NOBODY WAS THERE, AND EVERYTHING ABOUT THE STEVENSONS IS FAKE!!!" It's loony. People will think you've closed your account at the Bank of Sanity. But hey, nobody likes to argue with a whack-a-doodle. And if it makes you feel better to holler that something you don't want to believe is AI-generated, what the heck? I've heard worse arguments. What if ... and hear me out ... Donald Trump is actually AI-generated? And besides, Trump has been claiming things are fake for years. FAKE news, FAKE elections, FAKE voters. So pivoting to artificial intelligence as the provider of all the fake-ness makes perfect sense, in a wholly nonsensical way. Which leads me to a grand suggestion for those of us who find it hard to believe that any American still believes Trump is sufficiently compos mentis to be president: Let's assume those folks who support Trump, the ones who attend his rallies and believe a vote for him is a vote for democracy, are AI-generated. For that matter, let's assume Trump himself is the product of artificial intelligence, a fake avatar for the sort of mean-spirited human nuttiness only a computer could concoct. Trump, his MAGA movement, the past eight or so years ... all AI'd. All fake. The social media post accusing a political rival of using artificial intelligence to create crowds that were witnessed by thousands of people, documented by reporters and broadcast live? That was a FAKE post generated by a FAKE former president who has been FAKE driving us nuts since he came down a FAKE escalator and then never shut up. If Trump is, in fact, AI-generated, then he must drop out The Republicans are cheating. They clearly used AI to create Donald Trump. As such, he should be disqualified. I don't make the rules. The AI creation that calls itself Donald Trump does.