The BasePeople

Anna-Maria Gueorguieva

Titles as the sources gave them. In 1 entry, with 3 checked quotations.

What they said

Newest first. Each quotation was found word for word in the source.

“detectable AIGC from campaigns increased significantly across modalities over the observation window, and campaigns that use AIGC frequently do not disclose it.”
Measuring Generative AI Content in Political Campaigns: Evidence of Rising Adoption and Non-DisclosurearXiv, November 8, 2026. Speaking as: Other. The authors' abstract, stating the first of their three findings.
“in our review of 505 AI-detected images on X posts, we find no evidence of disclosure across all posts (both by the candidate and by the platform).”
Measuring Generative AI Content in Political Campaigns: Evidence of Rising Adoption and Non-DisclosurearXiv, November 8, 2026. Speaking as: Other. From the results section, on a manual check for AI labels on images in candidates' X posts.
“We caution these are descriptive differences among candidates whose AI use is measurable, and they are not evidence that the laws caused candidates to change their behavior.”
Measuring Generative AI Content in Political Campaigns: Evidence of Rising Adoption and Non-DisclosurearXiv, November 8, 2026. Speaking as: Other. From the section on state regulation, qualifying the finding that federal candidates in regulated states used less AI content.

In the Base

Every entry they appear in.

  1. ResearcharXivWrote it

    Measuring Generative AI Content in Political Campaigns: Evidence of Rising Adoption and Non-Disclosure

    University of Washington researchers apply AI detectors to text and images from the campaign websites, X accounts and emails of 12,977 US candidates from 2023 to 2025. They report rising detectable AI content, almost no disclosure, and no clear link between state laws and less AI use.