The label is a small part of a political advertisement until a lawyer arrives. Then it becomes the entire advertisement.

WJTV reported Friday that Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch warned Democratic Senate candidate Scott Colom that his campaign’s AI-generated ads appeared to violate the state’s deepfake law. Republican Party chairman Mike Hurst said the posts depicted a woman resembling Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith without identifying the video as AI-generated. Colom’s campaign called it parody and said it would delete the post rather than spend supporters’ money fighting a case.

That is a promise to remove it, not independent confirmation that it has disappeared. And Fitch’s allegation is not a court’s finding that the campaign broke the law.

What a time-saving innovation: manufacture the politician’s performance, then devote the campaign’s real human labor to explaining the distinction.

There is no liberal obligation to defend an unlabeled synthetic depiction just because a Democrat made it. If the joke depends on viewers understanding that the scene is invented, helping them understand is not surrender. A clear label is cheaper than a lengthy statement announcing that everyone should have recognized your exquisite comic intent.

Make powerful people uncomfortable.
Subscribe to Democrawonk.

Fitch’s threatened enforcement deserves scrutiny too. The state has enormous power compared with an individual speaker. It should explain the applicable standard, establish the facts and apply that standard consistently. A Republican complaint does not prove political persecution; a Republican attorney general does not become immune from questions about it either.

The campaign says its opponents are weaponizing the justice system. That is its accusation, not an established fact. We can ask whether enforcement is fair without pretending that the identity of the person complaining settles the answer.

For voters, the useful distinction is less glamorous than either side’s preferred drama: did this happen, or did somebody generate it? A campaign should be capable of answering before the viewer has to open a second tab and consult the attorney general.

Satire can make a politician look ridiculous without counterfeiting the evidence. If the target’s actual record won’t support your joke, the problem may not be insufficient computing power.