Rory Mulcahy

The Victorian election is still months away, yet voters are already being shown events which never happened. A machete attack at a petrol station, a woman giving birth on the roadside, floodwater pouring down the steps of parliament: all “deepfakes” generated by artificial intelligence (AI), and all reportedly appearing as paid advertising ahead of voters going to the polls.

Previously described as a potential “sleeper issue” for Australian politics, deepfake political content is rapidly becoming a very real electoral challenge.

We have been studying political deepfakes – and how people respond to them – in the lead up to the Victorian state election. Our preliminary results provide important insights into people’s ability to detect deepfakes and will help voters navigate the increasingly fraught information ecosystem as electoral campaigning ramps up.

As the world is increasingly flooded with deepfakes, the European Union is taking action to help people distinguish what is real and what is not.

It recently started enforcing transparency obligations for tech companies which require them to clearly label any photos, videos and audio which are created using their artificial intelligence (AI) systems and designed to look authentic.

This is a step up from the approach of other countries, such as Australia, which only recommend AI developers mark AI-generated content to help people identify it. This matters because research suggests that when confronted with sophisticated AI-generated content, our ability to distinguish fake from real can be little better than a coin-toss.

But will the EU’s approach actually work? And could requiring the labelling of AI-generated content have unintended consequences? Could it potentially make us more vulnerable to the very content designed to deceive us?

As America takes stock after Donald Trump’s re-election to the presidency, it’s worth highlighting the AI-generated fake photos, videos and audio shared during the campaign.

A slew of fake videos and images shared by Trump and his supporters purported to show his opponent, Kamala Harris, saying or doing things that did not happen in real life.

Of particular concern are deepfake videos, which are edited or generated using artificial intelligence (AI) and depict events that didn’t happen. They may appear to depict real people, but the scenarios are entirely fictitious.

Paris Olympics were marred by an outpouring of online trolling. Gunn's performance was met with a savage backlash on social media. Viral videos and memes mocking Gunn's unconventional style quickly spread, along with a barrage of racist, sexist and body-shaming comments. Trolls accused her of " disgracing " the Olympics and called for her disqualification. Days after the event was over, anonymous online critics continued to attack Gunn's appearance, talent and identity. The Raygun incident perfectly demonstrates how a combination of high-profile events, social media platform design and human psychology can reinforce each other to create a storm. The factors that lead to trolling are complex, but they also point us towards a solution.