Wong asks whether disclaimers are an enforcement problem or a gap

Yes, and as I see it, it's becoming, there's a very blurry line now between propaganda and news.

It seems to me that the public is perceiving it that way, and that concerns me, especially with the use of AI graphics, the videos of...

Of a mass crowd listening in to somebody making an announcement in public.

So those are concerning and those are misleading and they can be abused.

So the spirit of my bill is to clearly identify these messages that are created by influencers or they're subcontractors of some PR firm.

Hired by the administration, you know, that the public needs to know that it's one, it's like AI created, or two, it's paid by our tax dollars, right?

So that's where I'm coming from now.

What you're saying that this is already covered, but I don't see these disclaimers.

In social media videos that's used by pretty much everybody, not just the mayor's office.

So are we dealing with...

with an enforcement problem or we're dealing with gaps that we are addressing?

I will answer this as an example.

The Campaign Finance Board regulates the mayor's campaign and his activities on his campaign for office.

We do not regulate the mayor's activities or the activities of any city hall staffer in carrying out their public duties.

So this bill would actually not regulate the content of what City Hall is doing right now.

It would regulate what campaigns are doing.

So what you're telling me is that once the campaign is over, these propaganda videos are not governed by the campaign finance board.

Is that right?

Yes, that is correct.

If these videos were created as a result of the campaign, so if the campaign had paid an influencer to create videos on the campaign's behalf, that would be regulated campaign spending.

But once it's no longer associated with the campaign, it becomes something that we don't have regulatory oversight over.

Okay, thank you for making that clarification.

Thank you, Chair.