Politics

Copy article

MP Deepfaked Announcing Party Defection: The Platform Refused Removal

ended 28. October 2025

With local elections just six months away, deepfakes targeting candidates could have real electoral impact.

George Freeman MP, former AI minister, was hit by a deepfake video showing him switching from Conservative to Reform UK.  When he reported it to Meta, they refused to remove it, saying it didn't break their rules.

Thousands of voters saw the "footage". When Freeman denied it, social media users questioned if that denial was also fake. The former AI minister, someone who helped write UK AI policy, still had no way to fight back. Freeman still doesn't know if it was a prank or organised disinformation. What's clear: platform rules and UK law give almost no protection against AI fakes, even for those who know the technology.

Impersonating a police officer is rightly a serious crime because we need to trust those in uniform. The same applies to elected leaders and other representatives. Trust is key. Faking harmful content undermines democracy. We have lots of laws to protect us. For many reasons, the police and the Crown Prosecution Service struggle to act to redress the balance. But if platforms like Meta and X won't enforce basic standards, Parliament must step in to strengthen rights.

If we value our identities, the authorities and the platforms must help us defend them.

We want your views:

  • If a former AI minister with parliamentary resources couldn't get his deepfake removed, what protection exists for local candidates in the May 2026 elections?
  • Should social media companies be liable for the same damages and legal consequences as newspapers when they refuse to remove verified deepfakes?
  • When voters can't verify what politicians actually said, does democracy need digital impersonation laws as strong as physical/postal voter fraud laws?

5 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Star Quote
Copy

Colette Mason
AI Ethics Consultant at Clever Clogs AI
Meta refused to remove a verified deepfake of someone who literally helped write UK AI policy. If platforms won't protect a former government minister with resources and media access, they've made it clear they won't protect anyone.

We've built systems sophisticated enough to detect copyright infringement in milliseconds but apparently too primitive to identify political deepfakes, which tells you everything about what these companies actually value. With local elections six months away, every candidate is now vulnerable to attacks they can't defend against, from sources they can't identify, on platforms that profit from the confusion. Democracy runs on trust, and right now we're letting tech companies dismantle it.
Copy

Editor
Scott Gallacher
Director at Rowley Turton
I’m not surprised the former AI minister failed to get the deepfake removed. From my experience, social media companies don’t care about their customers—or the truth. I’ve reported outright scams before, and the platform took no action at all.

This should be a wake-up call. Social media companies urgently need stronger laws to make them responsible for preventing and removing scams and ensuring deepfakes aren’t allowed to circulate. Our democracy is in serious danger if we allow this to continue.
Copy

Editor
Mitali Deypurkaystha
AI Governance Strategist & CMO at AISensa
Yet again, social media giants like Meta are passing the buck. They make extraordinary profits yet refuse to police their own platforms responsibly. We’ve seen them fail to protect children from harmful content and consumers from fraud. Now they’re turning a blind eye to AI deepfakes that can distort elections. The problem isn’t that they can’t monitor every post; no one expects that. What’s unforgivable is their apathy once a verified fake is flagged. When even a former AI minister can’t get a false video removed, what chance does a local candidate have? Platforms claim to connect the world, but they’re eroding the very trust that democracy relies on. When citizens can no longer believe what they see, democratic truth itself begins to collapse. If Meta and others won’t enforce basic standards, Parliament must. Because unchecked, this isn’t free speech, it’s sanctioned deception.
Copy

Editor
Pete Mugleston
Mortgage Advisor & Managing Director at onlinemortgageadvisor.co.uk
Regulation and legislation need to catch up with the unprecedented pace of AI innovation. The creation and distribution of politically motivated deepfakes can be weaponised in disinformation campaigns to manipulate public opinion at scale.

Similar to defamation, there should be clear legal consequences, but attribution to the original creator can be almost impossible, and many well-meaning users may share them unaware that they are fake.

Any UK attempt to police this space may also face resistance from US platforms and a potential Trump administration wary of government interference in online speech.
Copy

Editor
Kate Underwood
Founder & Chief People Strategist at Kate Underwood HR and Training
If a former AI minister can be deepfaked and ignored by platforms, what hope does a local councillor have? The danger isn’t the tech, it’s our complacency. Lies move faster than truth, while tech giants act as editors of democracy without any accountability.

Meta’s refusal to remove a fake MP video shows this isn’t a glitch, it’s the business model. Outrage pays and confusion keeps people scrolling.

If it can happen to a minister, what chance does a small business have when a bitter employee uses AI to target a colleague? Reputations and jobs can collapse before the truth catches up. These are real lives, not just algorithms.

Until Parliament protects digital identity like physical identity, no one politician or voter can be sure who is really speaking.