Deepfakes and Political Lies: The Search for Authenticity

Why does it seem that voters reward political candidates for their outlandish statements and misinformation? The answer, paradoxically, may lie in the public’s desire for more authenticity in political candidates.

In a recent collaboration, my colleagues and I found that under certain conditions, a general public that is wise to a politician’s untruths can still view the lying politician as more authentic.

We, as recipients of political (mis)statements, are willing to support candidates’ lies if they speak to a deeper truth in which we believe. We find that these patterns persist no matter the political ideology or party loyalty.

This phenomenon raises two questions. First, why might voters value authenticity so highly in their candidates?  Second, how is it that breaking a democratic norm – for example, deliberately misleading the public – can foster perceptions of authenticity?

We need look no further than the internet and new information-distorting tools to understand why constituents might seek authenticity. Deepfakes, manipulated images, and AI-generated false stories are designed to deceive voters. The constant stream of information, and its dubious sources, increase our need to validate any information we receive, while at the same time lowering our ability to validate all of it. Creators of misleading content exploit this inability: as soon as we do enough research to validate one bit of information, new news comes out that contradicts that information or sends us back on the hunt to validate it anew.

Our incapacity to validate much of anything on our own means that we are left uncertain about what is true and what isn’t.

This uncertainty puts an increased premium on authenticity because we at least know what to expect from an authentic candidate, even if we do not like it.

So, while we can explain why we are searching for authenticity in politics, we are left with the second question: Why would a politician who deliberately shares misinformation (even known misinformation) appeal to voters?

Americans are all too familiar with gaps between a politician’s public image and private behavior. Scandals are a staple of news coverage. This reality, coupled with the information validation problem, leaves voters searching for authenticity among a group (politicians) that they already do not trust. How can an audience tell whether a politician is what they claim to be or not?

Our research shows us that a surefire way to generate perceptions of authenticity is to display a “disinterestedness” in others’ evaluations. After all, if someone proves disinterest in others’ evaluations, that person cannot be manipulating his image to fit observers’ demands.

In recent American politics, this disinteredness takes the form of breaking norms and making extreme statements. If someone is seen to knowingly lie or misstate facts, they should get no reward from a political system that relies on truth telling and information transparency. Yet it is this very act of doing so that makes the politician seem disinterested, and, therefore, more authentic.

While technology is a major source of the current insecurity about what’s authentic, it also presents opportunities to temper our current inflammatory political rhetoric. Could technology be used to help validate information for readers? Can a technology like blockchain allow readers to more easily validate the sources of information? Can AI be used not just to generate content, but also to help reduce the costs of validation?

We need to shift our technological focus from providing more information to reducing the high cost of validation. Only then can we reduce the demand for authenticity and reverse the tide of politicians seeking to present extreme signals of disinterest in democratic norms.