Deepfakes and the future of democracy

Democracy depends on one simple but powerful idea: citizens should make political decisions based on truthful information.

Elections, public debates, and accountability become meaningful only when people can distinguish facts from falsehood.

Today, however, artificial intelligence has introduced a new challenge to democratic societies. Deepfakes – AI-generated videos, images, and audio recordings that closely imitate real people-are making it increasingly difficult to separate reality from fabrication.

The question is no longer whether deepfakes will influence democracy, but how democracies can survive in an age where seeing is no longer believing.

Deepfakes have evolved rapidly during the last few years. Advances in generative AI have made it possible to create highly realistic videos of politicians delivering speeches they never gave or public figures appearing to support positions they never endorsed.

What once required sophisticated technical skills can now be produced with widely available AI tools. As a result, the cost of producing convincing political disinformation has fallen dramatically, while its potential reach through social media has expanded to millions within minutes.

Political scientist Hannah Arendt, in ‘The Origins of Totalitarianism’ (1951), warned that authoritarian politics thrives when the distinction between truth and lies becomes blurred.

Arendt argued that when citizens lose confidence in objective reality, they become more vulnerable to manipulation. Deepfake technology creates exactly this danger.

It does not simply spread false information; it weakens public confidence in the very existence of reliable evidence. When people begin to doubt authentic videos alongside fabricated ones, democracy itself becomes fragile.

The danger extends beyond election campaigns. Deepfakes can damage the reputation of candidates, incite communal violence, manipulate financial markets, and erode trust in public institutions.

Even after a deepfake is exposed as false, the damage often remains because misinformation spreads much faster than corrections.

Psychologists describe this as the “continued influence effect,” where false claims continue shaping public opinion even after they have been disproved.

Sociologist Manuel Castells, in ‘Communication Power’ (2009), argued that power in the digital age increasingly depends on controlling communication networks rather than traditional political institutions.

Deepfakes represent a new form of communication power because they manipulate not only information but also visual evidence, which people have historically trusted more than written text. In a networked society, a convincing fake video can influence millions before journalists or fact-checkers have time to respond.

The problem becomes even more serious because of what legal scholars call the “liar’s dividend.” This concept, developed by Bobby Chesney and Danielle Citron (2019), explains that once deepfakes become common, dishonest politicians may dismiss genuine evidence as fake.

Authentic recordings of corruption, abuse of power, or hate speech can be labelled “AI-generated.” Thus, deepfakes create a double threat: fabricated content becomes believable, while genuine evidence becomes questionable.

Recent global elections have demonstrated this growing challenge. AI-generated political advertisements, cloned candidate voices, and manipulated campaign messages have appeared in elections across several countries.

International organisations, including the World Economic Forum, have identified AI-driven misinformation as one of the most significant short-term global risks due to its potential to undermine democratic governance and social cohesion.

Bangladesh is not immune to these risks. The country’s rapid digitalisation, expanding social media use, and increasing dependence on online political communication create fertile conditions for AI-generated misinformation.

According to the Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC), the country has more than 130 million internet subscribers.

At the same time, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and other digital platforms have become major sources of political information, particularly for younger citizens. In such an environment, a convincing deepfake released during an election campaign could spread nationwide within hours.

The challenge is not only technological but also sociological. German sociologist Jürgen Habermas, in ‘The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere’ (1962), argued that democracy depends on rational public discussion in which citizens evaluate arguments through informed debate.

Deepfakes threaten this democratic public sphere by replacing reasoned discussion with manufactured emotional reactions. Instead of debating policies, citizens may spend their time arguing over whether a viral video is genuine.

The psychological effects are equally troubling. Human beings naturally trust visual information more than abstract evidence. Neuroscientific research shows that emotionally charged visual content spreads more rapidly on digital platforms because it attracts greater attention and engagement.

Deepfakes exploit this cognitive tendency by combining emotional storytelling with artificial realism, making them particularly effective instruments of political manipulation.

Technological solutions alone will not solve this problem. AI detection software continues to improve, but creators of deepfakes also develop increasingly sophisticated methods to evade detection.

This technological arms race suggests that democratic resilience cannot depend solely on algorithms.

Instead, societies must invest in digital literacy, independent journalism, rapid fact-checking systems, transparent AI governance, and stronger ethical standards for technology companies.

Governments also face a delicate balance. Laws against malicious deepfakes may be necessary, especially during elections, but excessive regulation risks restricting freedom of expression.

Democratic societies must therefore design legal frameworks that protect electoral integrity without undermining civil liberties.

Transparency requirements for AI-generated political content, platform accountability, and international cooperation against cross-border disinformation may provide more sustainable solutions than censorship alone.

Ultimately, the future of democracy will depend not only on technological innovation but also on public trust. Democracy cannot function if citizens no longer believe what they see, hear, or read.

The challenge posed by deepfakes is therefore much deeper than fake videos; it concerns the future of truth itself in democratic life.

As artificial intelligence continues to reshape communication, the central democratic question is no longer whether technology can imitate reality.

It is whether democratic institutions, independent media, and informed citizens can preserve a shared commitment to truth. Without that commitment, democracy risks becoming a contest not of ideas, but of increasingly convincing illusions.

(The writer is a researcher and development professional).