AI and Elections: What Happens When Voters Can’t Trust What They See?

  • AI-generated political content creates a challenge for communications teams because false messages can reach voters before anyone has an opportunity to correct them.
  • AI-assisted content, political satire and deceptive impersonation carry different risks. Recognizing those distinctions is essential to an effective response.
  • Protecting public trust requires preparation, including clear standards for verification, transparent use of AI and a plan for addressing misleading content.

A video of a candidate saying something they never said. A phone call in a familiar voice to voters across America. Artificial intelligence is making it harder to take political messages at face value. For communications professionals, that uncertainty creates a challenge that extends beyond any single election: how do you maintain credibility when audiences now question whether the information in front of them is real?

Political campaigns have long used advertising and targeted messaging to influence voters. AI adds another layer by making it easier to create convincing images, recordings and videos of events that never happened. Campaigns and organizations now need to consider both how they use these tools and how they will respond when others misuse them.

When Campaign Content Becomes Harder to Verify

Just last week on November 3, 2026, millions of voters across the country went to the polls, but this election was different. AI-generated ads flooded the internet during this election cycle. According to The New York Times, the Republican Party spent $137 million on AI generated campaign content for the midterm election.

In New York’s gubernatorial race, Republican candidate Bruce Blakeman’s campaign used AI-generated versions of Governor Kathy Hochul and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani in political advertising. One video depicts the two walking through a park and discussing affordability. While the ad isn’t real, it looks convincing enough that someone scrolling through social media could easily mistake it for an actual conversation. This raises a bigger concern about how AI is being used to mislead voters and spread misinformation during elections.

A different use of technology emerged during the 2024 presidential election. Ahead of New Hampshire’s Democratic primary, voters received phone calls using an AI-generated imitation of then-President Joe Biden’s voice to discourage them from voting. The FCC subsequently took enforcement action over the calls.

These examples raise different concerns, but both demonstrate the importance of establishing who actually created a message. When AI can imitate a candidate’s face or voice, voters cannot assume that a message was created or approved by the person it appears to represent.

Not Every Use of AI Carries the Same Risk

Using AI to help draft campaign materials is very different from creating a recording that falsely attributes a statement to a candidate. Clearly labeled satire also differs from impersonating a public official with the intent to mislead voters. When used responsibly, it can help campaigns communicate more efficiently, make information more accessible and even encourage political participation.

Those distinctions should shape the response. Before addressing questionable content, communications professionals need to establish what has been altered, how it is presented and whether audiences are likely to mistake it for a real message. Those kinds of disclosures provide useful and necessary context, but teams should also consider whether that context will remain visible when the content is clipped or shared across social media.

Protecting Our Democracy in the Age of AI

One of the most significant risks of AI misuse in elections is the loss of public trust. Our democracy largely depends on voters having access to accurate information about candidates, policies and election procedures. When fabricated content spreads, it can undermine confidence in both political leaders and the institutions responsible for running elections, making it harder for voters to make informed decisions.

That uncertainty can also cast doubt on authentic information. Voters may dismiss genuine recordings or statements as AI-generated, leaving even verified facts open to question. Over time, this skepticism risks discouraging participation in the democratic process altogether.

AI will continue to change how political messages are produced. The responsibility of communications professionals remains clear: verify what they share, be transparent and make reliable sources easy for voters to find. These responsibilities extend beyond election day. Once credibility and public trust are lost, a correction alone will not be enough to restore it.

AI in Nonprofit Communications: What Ethical Use Actually Looks Like 

By: Rachel Bauman

AI can strengthen nonprofit communications — but only when paired with human judgment. AI should be used to improve efficiency and should strengthen the work of trusted communications professionals, not replace the human expertise that builds public trust. 

  • Ethical AI starts with protecting people and preserving trust. Nonprofits should avoid using AI for tasks involving lived experiences, sensitive community stories or official organizational positions without careful human oversight. 
  • Clear AI policies reduce risk. Organizations should also recognize that publicly available AI platforms may not provide the same confidentiality protections as internal systems. Before entering sensitive information into AI tools, communicators should understand how the platform stores and uses data and ensure its use aligns with organizational privacy policies and contractual obligations. 
  • Responsible AI adoption should reinforce an organization’s mission, values and credibility rather than compromise them. 

Trust can take years to build and minutes to lose. In 2025, the Chicago Sun-Times faced widespread criticism after publishing an AI-generated reading list that included books that didn’t exist. The incident wasn’t simply about AI making mistakes. It demonstrated how quickly credibility can be eroded when human oversight is removed. For nonprofits, where public trust is often an organization’s most valuable asset, the stakes are even higher. 

Artificial intelligence (AI) has quickly become part of the communications landscape, with tools that are increasingly embedded in daily workflows. For nonprofit communicators, however, the conversation cannot begin and end with efficiency. 

Organizations built around public trust, community engagement and social impact face a different set of questions than many corporate brands when it comes to the use of AI. As these tools become more common, nonprofit PR professionals must consider how AI affects accuracy, transparency, equity and the communities they serve. 

Concerns about AI are not theoretical. Large language models can reinforce existing biases, generate inaccurate information and reflect perspectives that may not align with the lived experiences of the communities that nonprofits serve. When advocating for marginalized groups, a communications mistake is not just an embarrassment; it can undermine credibility, damage trust and misrepresent the very people the organization exists to support. Ethical AI use requires recognizing these risks rather than assuming technology is neutral. 

At the same time, nonprofit communications teams are often asked to accomplish more with fewer resources. Many professionals are managing media relations, social media, content creation, stakeholder communications and executive visibility simultaneously. Used thoughtfully, AI can alleviate administrative burdens and create more capacity for strategic storytelling and messaging. The key distinction is that AI should support human expertise, not replace it. Decisions that shape public understanding, organizational reputation and community relationships still require human judgment.  

Ethical use often comes down to where AI is being applied in the workflow. In practice that can look like compiling meeting recordings into clean action items, reviewing an email or document for grammatical errors or stress-testing an op-ed by how critics might challenge its argument. These all present relatively low risk when appropriate oversight is maintained. The risk increases the closer a task gets to representing real people, lived experiences or organizational positions. 

Transparency is another important consideration. Nonprofit communicators should be clear about how AI is being used within their organizations and establish processes to ensure appropriate human review of AI-assisted work. While disclosure practices may vary from one organization to another, there should be a baseline commitment to transparency whenever AI is used in ways that could influence public understanding or stakeholder engagement. Stakeholders support nonprofits because they trust the people behind the mission, and that trust can be weakened when AI-generated content is presented as authentic community voice or firsthand experience. 

Nonprofit communicators must also think carefully about privacy and data security. Many organizations work with vulnerable populations and routinely handle sensitive information. Uploading client stories, internal documents or personally identifiable information into public AI systems can create significant ethical and legal concerns. Before incorporating AI into communications workflows, organizations should establish clear guidelines on what information can and cannot be shared with external tools. 

Responsible AI use begins with protecting the people an organization serves. No productivity gain is worth compromising community trust or confidentiality.   

For nonprofit communicators, AI should be treated as a tool rather than an author, strategist or spokesperson. When used thoughtfully, it can help teams work more effectively. When used carelessly, it can undermine the trust that nonprofit organizations spend years building. The responsibility is not simply to use AI, but to use it in ways that strengthen rather than compromise an organization’s mission and values.  

The AI Boom: What it Means for the Nonprofit World

By: Darwin Morales-Ortiz

Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing the way organizations across most industries operate – and nonprofits are no exception. As AI tools become more accessible, many nonprofits are finding ways to incorporate them into their work, from streamlining operations to enhancing communications. Now, with more than 80% of nonprofits reporting using AI to some degree, it’s important for organizations to understand both its potential and its limitations.
Ways AI Is Supporting Nonprofit Work

AI has the ability to build capacity. Platforms like ChatGPT can assist with tasks such as content creation, donor outreach and messaging. This support is especially valuable for organizations operating with limited budgets. 

Nonprofits can also benefit from AI’s ability to assist with grant writing by reviewing guidelines, checking eligibility requirements and drafting materials. Additionally, it can help generate ideas for fundraising events, allowing organizations to have more time to focus on their mission-driven work. Tools like Google Gemini are examples of platforms already supporting nonprofits with these tasks. 

Many organizations use AI for data analysis, including donor segmentation, streamlining reporting and automating data entry. According to Nonprofit Pro, 64% of nonprofits are “using AI to analyze end user data to understand their needs and pain points.”

The growing presence of AI is allowing organizations, especially smaller ones, to operate in a crowded sector, with DonorSearch reporting that 68% of nonprofits already use it for data analysis. By streamlining time-consuming tasks like content creation and data analysis, these tools help nonprofits work more effectively and focus on areas they consider most important. Access to this technology has the potential to create equal footing, allowing under-resourced nonprofits to compete with larger, better-funded organizations.

Challenges and Concerns Around AI Use

While AI can be a powerful tool, it also raises concerns around misinformation and credibility. According to the Columbia Journalism Review article, “AI Search Has A Citation Problem,” generative tools often provide users with inaccurate information since they don’t reject questions they are unable to answer. Further, these tools can sometimes fail to link back to original publishers or cite the wrong sources altogether. This not only contributes to the spread of misinformation, but it also has the potential to damage the reputation of the organizations relying on AI tools’ output. 

Beyond potential accuracy issues, AI tools may fail to capture an organization’s voice or use language that aligns with its values. Without careful oversight, AI tools can create language that feels generic and disconnected from the people nonprofits work to serve. The lack of a human touch can lead to challenges for nonprofits hoping to communicate with communities in an authentic, personal way that builds trust. 

Ethical considerations also come into play, from ensuring AI-generated content aligns with organizations’ missions and values to transparency regarding their use of AI. Despite these concerns, fewer than 10% of nonprofits have official policies around AI use, according to Nonprofit Quarterly. Establishing guidelines can help organizations implement AI into their work while preserving their integrity. 

While some see AI as a tool for greater efficiency, broader reach and funding competitiveness, others believe it raises concerns around trust and authenticity–especially in a sector built on relationships. As this technology evolves, nonprofits will need to work intentionally and responsibly when using AI to ensure it doesn’t weaken their connection to the communities they serve.

Final Thoughts

AI offers nonprofits opportunities to increase capacity and streamline tasks. From content creation to grant writing, smaller teams can use these tools to develop efficiency. However, AI is not without limitations. Misinformation, lack of personalization and ethical considerations mean that AI-generated content requires consistent, careful vetting and editing to ensure content is always accurate and authentic. With technology and proper oversight, organizations can use AI to their advantage while staying true to their mission and values.

Back to top