OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

AI Deepfakes and Tools Influence 2026 Midterm Elections

6 sources · updated 2026-11-05
Left 50% Center 33% Right 17%
3 left · 2 center · 1 right

What happened

During the 2026 U.S. midterm elections, campaigns used generative AI in political ads and posts, and AI chatbots supplied voting information to users. The Wesleyan Media Project reported more than $187 million spent on nearly 300 ads generated or enhanced by AI, with more than 90 percent of that spending from Republican candidates, a Republican party committee, or Republican-leaning groups. OpenAI said ChatGPT, through a partnership with nonprofit Democracy Works, provided Election Day and voting information more than 16 million times this cycle; on Nov. 3, 2026, Josh Lawson, OpenAI’s head of civic and strategic risk, discussed the company’s Election Night safeguards with NBC News. There is no comprehensive federal law requiring disclosure of AI in political ads; about 30 states have differing rules. YouTube, Meta, and X applied their own labeling, verification, and removal policies to AI-generated political content.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 6 articles

4 of 4 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 4 of 4
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Wesleyan Media Project, OpenAI, Anthropic, Robin Swanson, Chris Lehane and Kate Brennan
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 1 of 4
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: regulatory filing
Credits another outlet 0 of 4
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 0 of 4
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Nov 2, 17:13 UTC by Breitbart, naming its source. First document in the first report, from Breitbart (regulatory filing).
Not counted 2
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
ONE-SIDED THIS WEEK. Only left-leaning outlets have covered this story in the last two days; New York Post reported it on 2026-10-30.
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Left-leaning coverage is the only account of AI-generated campaign ads in the 2026 midterms. Spending on those ads exceeded $187 million, according to CNBC. Right-leaning outlets had not covered the story as of publication. A reader on that side therefore never learns that over 90 percent of the spending came from Republican candidates or allied groups, often without the disclaimers some states require. Left-leaning coverage also cannot agree on the lead. The ads arrive as "slopaganda" in CNBC's telling. NBC News instead takes viewers inside OpenAI's "election war room." One story is unlabeled clips on major platforms. The other is a company staffing safeguards for Election Night. Did any AI-generated ad change the result of a 2026 race?
Bottom line

Skip the left and you never hear CNBC's $187 million AI-ad tally. Stay only with the left and you still never learn whether those ads moved a vote.

The receipts — 4 facts one side's coverage lacks
  • More than $187 million was spent on ads generated or enhanced by AI this cycle numberin CNBC · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • Over 90 percent of that spending came from Republican candidates, a Republican party committee, or a Republican-leaning group numberin CNBC · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • There is no comprehensive federal law governing the use or disclosure of AI in political ads contextin CNBC · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • None of the proposed bills on deceptive AI in elections have advanced out of committee contextin CNBC · absent from right-leaning coverage
The Left View
NBC News reported from inside OpenAI’s “election war room,” featuring Lawson on planned Election Night safeguards and AI’s role in the midterms. CNBC framed the cycle as dominated by “slopaganda”—AI-generated or enhanced campaign ads—citing the Wesleyan spend figures and Republican share, and describing examples including an undisclosed fake video of New York Gov. Kathy Hochul posted by Republican Bruce Blakeman and an AI video of Democrat James Talarico from Republican Ken Paxton’s Texas campaign with a brief disclosure. The Hill reported ChatGPT’s more than 16.5 million Democracy Works lookups. CBS News said political AI deepfakes were infiltrating the midterms and could pose risks to voters. TechCrunch, after Democrats flipped Congress, covered OpenAI global affairs chief Chris Lehane’s essay urging 2028 AI policy rather than focusing only on midterm deepfakes.
Our Take (balanced)
The story is substantive: it cites a named research analysis, named candidates and ads, named company officials, platform policy statements, and a quantified chatbot partnership. Established are Wesleyan’s published spend totals and partisan split, OpenAI’s stated Democracy Works query volume, the lack of a comprehensive federal AI-ad disclosure law, and the existence of roughly 30 state laws. Remaining alleged or unverified are the effect of these ads on voter behavior, whether specific spots violated state disclosure rules, and how consistently platforms labeled AI content; campaigns in the cited examples did not immediately comment. No right-leaning outlet has reported this. Watch next for campaign, FEC, or state election-official responses; independent checks of the Wesleyan figures; platform reports on labeled versus unlabeled political AI; and whether bills such as the Protect Elections from Deceptive AI Act move out of committee.

6 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.