NAB Re-Addresses FCC’s Proposed AI Disclosure Policy Rules for Broadcasters, Saying Arguments from the NPRM’s Most Vocal Proponents Are “Inappropriate or Absurd,” With Additional Support From All Broadcast Associations of state.

In its responding comments, NAB again asserts that the FCC does not have the legal authority to implement such regulations and that the proposed rules would not stand up to legal scrutiny under the Administrative Procedure Act or of the first amendment. The comments build on NAB’s initial 74-page position.

“Given the insurmountable problems resulting from its lack of legal authority, the Commission cannot hope to promulgate rules that effectively promote the public’s ability to evaluate the substance and reliability of false, misleading, and misleading AI-generated political advertisements.” , NAB said. “Only Congress can combat AI-generated political deepfakes across all platforms and reach advertisers creating political ads and should therefore be the entity that takes the lead in considering any necessary regulatory action.”

As for proponents of the rule who argue that it would not violate free speech, “these same commentators’ flawed analyzes of the First Amendment have also failed to recognize, much less address, the charges that “The proposed rules burden broadcasters, candidates and other stakeholders,” the NAB said. “In short, commenters have done virtually nothing to demonstrate that the FCC’s proposals would satisfy strict, demanding, or intermediate scrutiny or even rational scrutiny.”

The association notes that even some supporters of the FCC’s proposals acknowledge that the scope is too broad and problematic.

A coalition of all 50 state broadcaster associations, as well as those representing the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, are also urging the agency to drop the proposed rules. In their joint filing, they say the FCC’s proposals are “seriously flawed”, would not achieve their intended goals and could result in significant harm to broadcasters, advertisers and the public.

“Adding the new education, investigation, investigation and disclosure requirements proposed in the NPRM would significantly increase the burden on stations,” the state associations asserted. They pointed out that many channels are operating with skeleton staff and are already under immense time pressure to comply with current regulations on political advertising.

They argue that focusing on the mere presence of AI in political ads is problematic, as AI can be used for both positive and benign purposes in advertising production. “Hanging on a technology over a particular use that might be put to it is both short-sighted and detrimental to the public, the candidates and, as collateral damage, the broadcasters,” they wrote.

The state associations conclude their filing by requesting “that the Commission terminate this proceeding without adopting the proposals or any similar regulations suggested by commenters in this proceeding,” they wrote.

The FCC will consider comments submitted during the now-closed public comment period before making a decision on whether to adopt, modify, or abandon the proposed rules.