AI-Generated Fake Comments Flood Regulatory Processes

The U.S. Public is intended to have a voice in government policy through public comment periods. Though, these proceedings are increasingly being undermined by automated, artificial intelligence (AI)-generated comments designed to manipulate regulators and sway policy decisions in favor of specific interests. This trend, long present with industry-backed bots and fabricated submissions, is now being significantly amplified by advances in AI technology.

The Problem of Fake Comments

For years, concerns have been raised about the integrity of U.S. Regulatory comment processes. Industries have been accused of using bots and fake comments to create the illusion of broad public support for policies like giant mergers and deregulation, and the elimination of consumer protections. A notable example occurred during the net neutrality debate, where fabricated comments, even using the names of deceased individuals, were submitted to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Washington State Tax Debate Highlights the Issue

Recently, Washington State experienced a surge of fake comments during a debate over a proposed tax on the wealthy. According to reports, over 37,000 opposition comments flooded the public comment system. Organizers identified over 15,000 instances of identical names being submitted repeatedly – sometimes dozens of times – often late at night or in rapid succession.

Despite evidence of these fabricated submissions, opponents of the tax, including state Republican leaders and hedge fund manager Brian Heywood, attempted to use the volume of comments as “proof” that the proposal lacked public support. These claims were made even as concerns were raised about the ineffectiveness of existing measures to block automated submissions.

Broader Implications and the War on Informed Consensus

This manipulation of public comment periods is part of a larger trend of attacks on informed consensus and journalism. The ability to generate convincing, yet entirely fabricated, public support for a position raises serious questions about the integrity of the regulatory process. As seen in past instances, the need to create fake public support often indicates a weakness in the underlying argument.

Government Efforts and Resources

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) actively solicits public comment on proposed rules, requests for information, and potential information collections, as outlined in the Paperwork Reduction Act [1]. The CFPB is currently reconsidering coverage of certain transactions and financial institutions under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B), including data collection requirements [1].

Regulations.gov [3] serves as the federal government’s platform for public access to and participation in regulatory processes. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) as well actively engages in consumer protection and enforces laws related to competition and fair business practices [2]. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) also follows a standard rulemaking process, allowing public participation [4].

Key Takeaways

• AI is exacerbating the problem of fake comments in regulatory proceedings.
• Industries and individuals are using automated tools to create the illusion of public support for their preferred policies.
• The integrity of the public comment process is being undermined, hindering informed decision-making.
• Government agencies are actively seeking public input, but face challenges in distinguishing genuine comments from fabricated ones.