Why Not Just Release Deepfake Videos of Your Political Opponent, If the Law Won't Stop You?
She challenged the videos and called for Congress to establish safeguards against deceptive AI content.
SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYJezebel is an established national publication with a named author, but this piece is overtly opinionated rather than a neutral report. Its credibility as a publisher is stronger than that of an anonymous blog, while the article’s presentation warrants caution.
- Source type — A national publication, though this article uses a strongly opinionated style.
- Author attribution — A named author is identified.
- Transparency — The piece identifies the campaign letter and quotes Cooke, but provides limited independent sourcing.
The article identifies the campaign’s stated arguments and quotes Cooke’s letter and statement, while also naming relevant Wisconsin law and the absence of federal protections. It offers little independent sourcing or response from Van Orden’s campaign, and its highly charged language weakens the presentation.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The article reports the campaign’s stated defenses that state law does not apply and that the videos are satire, but does not provide a direct response or independent assessment of those arguments. Its language and framing strongly favor Cooke’s position.
- Loaded language — Repeatedly uses disparaging and emphatic descriptions of Van Orden and Republicans.
- Source diversity — Quotes Cooke, but offers little direct sourcing from the campaign or independent experts.
- Counterarguments presented — Mentions the campaign’s legal and satire arguments, but does not quote the campaign directly or examine its case in depth.
The article uses strongly negative language about Republicans and Van Orden while framing Cooke’s objections sympathetically. Its presentation is distinctly left-leaning rather than a neutral account of the campaign dispute.
- Language tone — Uses terms such as “disgustingly desperate” and “brazenly flout” to characterize Van Orden and Republicans.
- Framing — Frames the videos as a Republican tactic against Democrats and presents Cooke’s position sympathetically.
- Source selection — Quotes Cooke but does not include a direct response from Van Orden or his campaign.
Jezebel reports that Rep. Derrick Van Orden’s campaign has circulated AI-generated videos of his opponent, Rebecca Cooke, and that Cooke sent the campaign a cease-and-desist letter. The article says the campaign continued releasing videos afterward.
Jezebel reports that Van Orden’s campaign has circulated AI-generated videos depicting Cooke saying things she did not say. Cooke sent the campaign a cease-and-desist letter, alleging the videos were defamatory and misleading. The article says the campaign has continued releasing videos and has argued that state laws do not apply to the federal race or that the videos are satire.
The article says Wisconsin law requires manipulated images in ads to include a clear AI disclaimer, which it says the videos lack. It also notes that federal protections have not been enacted and quotes Cooke calling on Congress to establish safeguards for the technology.
Community verdict
7 VOTES
- Readers of left-leaning coverage: 80% good look
- Readers of right-leaning coverage: not enough votes yet
People in this story
SWIPE →Wisconsin House candidate who sent Van Orden’s campaign a cease-and-desist letter
Wisconsin representative whose campaign released AI-generated videos targeting his opponent
Van Orden's version of this story ↗
President, referenced as a political comparison
Former president depicted in a fabricated video scenario
Former Wisconsin representative whose seat Van Orden later won
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…