Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Integrity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee backs disclosure rule for synthetic media near elections; bill advanced
Summary
S.23 would require disclosures when manipulated audio, image or video is intended to injure a candidate or influence an election; the committee approved an amended bill with penalties and several exemptions and the Senate ordered third reading after floor questioning about scope and potential amendments.
The Vermont Senate on March 19 advanced S.23, legislation aimed at requiring disclosures when synthetic media is used to deceive voters or injure a candidate within a 90-day period before an election.
Senator Collamore, reporting for the Committee on Government Operations, described the bill as defining "deceptive and fraudulent synthetic media" and requiring a clear disclosure — "this media has been created or intentionally manipulated by digital technology or artificial intelligence" — when such media is published within 90 days of an election and the publisher should have known it was deceptive.
The bill defines synthetic media broadly to include manipulated images, audio, or video that create a false but realistic representation of an individual's appearance, speech, or conduct. The committee added exemptions for parody, radio and television broadcasters that include their own authenticity notices, websites/newspapers/magazines that clearly state the media does not accurately represent the person, and certain user-generated platforms and telecom carriers when federal rules apply.
Penalties in the committee amendment include fines up to $1,000 for an intentional violation, and up to $5,000 where the manipulation is done "knowingly and intentionally with intent to cause violence or bodily harm," with higher fines for repeat violations. The bill also allows a harmed candidate to seek an injunction and permits enforcement actions by a state's attorney or the attorney general.
On the floor Senator Collamore said the committee spent several weeks hearing testimony and noted other states' approaches: "There have been 2 states to our knowledge, California and Minnesota, that have outright banned this. We were cautioned by our legislative council that the likelihood of objections for First Amendment rights would increase had we chosen to go the banning route."
Senators on the floor asked whether the bill's coverage should extend beyond candidate ballots to include propositions and municipal votes; Collamore said the committee intended to capture efforts to "influence the outcome of an election," and indicated the committee would consider friendly amendments to broaden the language. The Senate amended the bill as recommended by committee and ordered third reading.
The committee reported unanimous support (5-0) and listed witnesses including the Secretary of State's office, attorney general's office, public-interest groups and broadcasters. The bill would take effect on passage.
