CBS News97%

Use of AI and deepfakes growing in U.S. elections, sparking integrity debate 82%

6/22/2026, 11:59:52 PM

Topics: Video
Keywords: Youtube

BS Summary: This video contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Overconfidence Bias, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 34.4% saturation with 276 hits. Analysis detected 2,301 faulty-reasoning hits from 803 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 73.9% and a BS Rank of 82% (3,839 of 21,075 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 81.80% of the video peer group.

Artificial intelligence is playing a 
growing role in this year's elections, 
targeting voters before they head to the 
polls. AI-generated images, videos, and 
deep fakes are becoming more common in 
political advertising to attack 
opponents or influence Americans' 
opinions, and multiple political parties 
are using the technology. Here's a look. 
>> They rebuilt [music] the Palisades? 
How? 
>> The mayor fixed it. 
>> Wow. 
Karen [music] Bass really turned the city around. 
>> Karen Bass isn't the mayor anymore, honey. 
>> Who? 
Who's the mayor? 
>> Spencer Pratt. [music] 
>> Changing the gender of all your offspring, 
>> [music] 
>> these are a few of my favorite things. 
>> And I could pretend to do a lot of jobs, 
but I know what I know, [music] and I know what I don't know. 
>> cheating with the squad on the American 
>> While some campaigns voluntarily disclose the use of AI, there aren't many regulations requiring transparency. 
CBS News political director Fin Gomez joins us now, and Fin, these are all over our social media feeds. How is this reshaping the political landscape? 
>> Yeah, for one thing, you're seeing similar effects that are hitting other industries hit the campaign trail. 
Campaigns no longer need massive productions, production budgets, or staff to create these polished ads, 
videos, uh the digital content you that you showed right there. A candidate with a smaller staff, uh compared to previous cycles, can now produce material that looks like it came from a major production studio, if you will. Uh but 
also, it means it could be harder for junior staffers to be hired, I've been told by some previous campaign managers from other cycles. And the other flip 
side is that voters are being flooded, 
as you saw there in that opening video, with more content and ads than ever before, making it harder to distinguish what's authentic, what's real, uh from what's been fabricated by AI. 
Uh so, 
that in many ways, uh AI is becoming uh the next political frontier uh, on these political campaigns and it's changing daily, it's changing monthly. So, what we're what we're discussing now, uh, 
what parties are are trying to uh, look into now could be completely different in 6 months from now and will absolutely be different by the time we reach the 2028 cycle. 
>> I mean, some of them 
look like slop still. You know, you see the kind of main character, you know, whether it's Gavin Newsom or whatever turn and it's no longer Gavin Newsom um, 
or just move. But but some of them maybe could be really tricking people, misleading voters into thinking it's real. 
real. Are there certain groups that are more vulnerable? Um, and is anything being done in Washington to put any safeguards in? 
>> Well, look Lindsey, I mean, for for one, look, if you look at some of the videos that you ran, they're pretty convincing, 
right? Uh, and and some of those, like the James Taylor Rico for one, uh, I I was asked by people I know who are intelligent people who follow uh, who follow politics, maybe not to the extent that you and I do, uh, but they asked me if that was a real ad. 
They got that from somewhere. If they and and it's obviously it's it's fake, it's AI. Um, 
but it did spread and it was seen by millions. 
And so, you're seeing sort of this this uh, this information, these type of ads get out there in the bloodstream, if you will, and before journalists or or um, really sort of overseers uh, uh, you know, guard watchdog groups can really flag it and as you see seen there, it can really spread like wildfire the fire. Um, in terms of like um, 
what voter group could be most uh, susceptible to uh, being convinced that 
some of these are real, I think I if you look at senior voters who may be less familiar with the technology can be very vulnerable, I've been told. But frankly, this could affect a lot of people 
throughout the electorate. AI-generated content is getting more sophisticated by the the and many voters simply assume that if they see a video on their phone, 
uh, on their TV, that it's real. And so, that's really what has really changed the dynamic. 
Also, I got to add this, 
Lindsey. I spoke to several potential 2028 presidential candidates who have told me flat out, AI and AI-related issues, like like cutting the workforce, potentially cutting the workforce because of AI, 
will be a top issue in 2028. It's already a big one in 2026. 
>> Ben Gomez, thank you. 
>> Thank you. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.9%CBS Miami: 2.2%Confirmation Bias2.9%This article: 1.4%CBS Miami: 0.6%Anchoring Bias1.4%This article: 24.7%CBS Miami: 2.5%Availability Heuristic24.7%This article: 7.5%CBS Miami: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic7.5%This article: 1.0%CBS Miami: 0.5%Hindsight Bias1.0%This article: 27.3%CBS Miami: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias27.3%This article: 7.0%CBS Miami: 6.0%Framing Effect7.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.9%CBS Miami: 1.9%Optimism Bias5.9%This article: 10.2%CBS Miami: 1.1%Pessimism Bias10.2%This article: 28.9%CBS Miami: 6.7%Negativity Bias28.9%This article: 1.7%CBS Miami: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias1.7%This article: 0.5%CBS Miami: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.5%This article: 3.5%CBS Miami: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%CBS Miami: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias4.9%This article: 7.7%CBS Miami: 1.7%Halo Effect7.7%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.9%CBS Miami: 1.1%Recency Bias5.9%This article: 0.6%CBS Miami: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.6%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 24.5%CBS Miami: 4.3%Appeal to Authority24.5%This article: 1.9%CBS Miami: 1.1%False Dilemma1.9%This article: 10.6%CBS Miami: 0.5%Slippery Slope10.6%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 28.3%CBS Miami: 2.5%Hasty Generalization28.3%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 16.6%CBS Miami: 4.1%Appeal to Emotion16.6%This article: 2.1%CBS Miami: 0.8%Begging the Question2.1%This article: 19.8%CBS Miami: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)19.8%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 4.7%CBS Miami: 0.4%Burden of Proof4.7%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 34.4%CBS Miami: 1.2%Anecdotal34.4%This article: 1.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%No True Scotsman1.0%This article: 1.4%CBS Miami: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.4%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 2.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.4%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

803 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers5.4%attributed speech760writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageKaren Bass • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageSpencer Pratt • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageFin Gomez • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 54 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 65 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageBen Gomez • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Fin Gomez

100%flagged-word coverage
26 attributed words60% of attributed speech95% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.