Meta Allows Deepfake of Irish Presidential Candidate To Spread for 12 Hours Before Removal (irishtimes.com)
(Wednesday October 22, 2025 @05:20PM (msmash)
from the meta-doing-meta-things dept.)
- Reference: 0179851584
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/25/10/22/1724212/meta-allows-deepfake-of-irish-presidential-candidate-to-spread-for-12-hours-before-removal
- Source link: https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2025/10/22/meta-removes-ai-video-purporting-to-show-catherine-connolly-quitting-presidential-race/
Meta removed a deepfake video from Facebook that falsely depicted Catherine Connolly withdrawing from Ireland's presidential election. The video was posted to an account called RTE News AI and viewed almost 30,000 times over 12 hours before the Irish Independent [1]contacted the platform . The fabricated bulletin featured AI-generated versions of RTE newsreader Sharon Ni Bheolain and political correspondent Paul Cunningham announcing that Connolly had ended her campaign and the election scheduled for Friday would be cancelled.
Connolly responded in a statement that she remained a candidate and called the video a disgraceful attempt to mislead voters. Meta confirmed the account violated its community standards against impersonating people and organizations. Ireland's media regulator Coimisiun na Mean contacted Meta about the incident and reminded the platform of its obligations under the EU Digital Services Act. An Irish Times poll published last Thursday found Connolly leading the race with 38% support.
[1] https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2025/10/22/meta-removes-ai-video-purporting-to-show-catherine-connolly-quitting-presidential-race/
Connolly responded in a statement that she remained a candidate and called the video a disgraceful attempt to mislead voters. Meta confirmed the account violated its community standards against impersonating people and organizations. Ireland's media regulator Coimisiun na Mean contacted Meta about the incident and reminded the platform of its obligations under the EU Digital Services Act. An Irish Times poll published last Thursday found Connolly leading the race with 38% support.
[1] https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2025/10/22/meta-removes-ai-video-purporting-to-show-catherine-connolly-quitting-presidential-race/
This is mild (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward
Considering fake posts on FB have enabled massacres, without FB having a sense of urgency to properly moderate... this is mild in comparison.
Not reasonable (Score:2)
by registrations_suck ( 1075251 )
It's not reasonable to expect a company that allows user posting of material to be aware of everything that is posted.
Is there is some rule that requires removing of "bad" info, it should only be after a period of time after a company is notified it exists and has had time to investigate and determine its veracity.
Other question (Score:2)
by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 )
Meta has offices and employees in Ireland, so was this simply an oversight or is there some reason Meta would benefit from or prefer Catherine Connolly not winning?
Re: (Score:2)
by jfdavis668 ( 1414919 )
Maybe the Meta employees thought the post was real
Frightening because (Score:2)
...such shenanigans can swing an election. Somebody needs bigly jail, or a cruise missile up the wazoo if overseas.
Re: Frightening because (Score:2)
Free speech absolutists won't like this
Re: (Score:2)
Moot because those guys aren't any longer anyhow, as half died in a theater panic after a faker yelled "fire!" and the other half drank Clorox to prevent Covid.
Re: Frightening because (Score:4, Insightful)
There is no such thing. The people who claim they are free speech absolutists are the first ones to prohibit speech they don't like or which doesn't fit their narrative.
They only want free speech when it applies to them and echoes their speech.
"Free Speech Absolutists" want a free audience... (Score:5, Insightful)
> wrong. there absolutely are free speech absolutists, that you have never encountered one says a lot more about the circles you run in..
That's absolutely not the case. You say something offensive, I don't want you banned...I want the right to tell you to go fuck yourself. EVERY FUCKING "Free Speech Absolutist" doesn't want free speech, but a free, passive audience where they can say whatever they want without feedback. For awhile, ever right wing asshole on slashdot was complaining about free speech when people called them assholes for their comments....and were horrified at the downvoting system
Free speech goes both ways....feedback is speech...being booed is free speech. Free speech is not a magic privilege where you can say whatever you want and we'll patiently listen to you....you have the freedom to say what you want without being jailed by the government...not the freedom to force an audience to listen to your bullshit without feedback.
First of all, free speech absolutism is childish and stupid...no...no one actually wants free speech...we're in the age of AI and Russian troll farms...no one wants "speech" that is fraud or clearly lies. Yeah, it makes you feel good to say you're for free speech, but you don't want to listen to a nonstop stream of lies and commercials and scams. Modern technology allows bad actors to overwhelm audiences in ways that the founding fathers could have never anticipated. In 1776, it was easy to read a newspaper and say "this is a lie"...they didn't receive the same lie 1000x in their e-mail, texts, and various online outlets. People like Putin have figured that if you lie forcefully enough, the opposition eventually cedes.
Secondly, people who use "free speech" in comments and sentences are the ones most likely to be fragile when reading opposing views. Free speech isn't a hall pass to be an asshole and not face social consequences. You have the right to be an asshole....I have the right to call you an asshole...either of us can get downvoted on platform for our words and behavior....that's free speech.
Re: (Score:2)
Society needs for absolutists of all kinds to not like a lot of things.
Re: (Score:1)
As a free speech absolutist myself, I don't care if people are so stupid that they believe everything they're being told. The only problem I have is there are people believe the lies and vote.
See my signature for more info. Democracy is the collective stupidity of all of us, telling the rest of us how we ought to be ruled. -
Re: (Score:3)
> As a free speech absolutist myself, I don't care if people are so stupid that they believe everything they're being told. The only problem I have is there are people believe the lies and vote.
So it would be OK with you if someone were telling your young child that mommy and daddy were hurt and needed them to come quickly? And that they were there to take them to their parents? That they have candy in the back of the van? That there is a lost puppy over in the trees just outside the park? Poison labeled as candy?
Free speech, no limits!
There are a lot of things that people can say that need to be prohibited by society because they lead directly to harm of vulnerable people. Absolutism does not