Latest / Minds, Bodies, and Terawatts / The FCC Is Deciding Whether an AI Can Call Your Cellphone About the Election Without Asking. The Group That Wants It Says It's Not a Robocall Because a Person Presses the Button

Transcript

The FCC Is Deciding Whether an AI Can Call Your Cellphone About the Election Without Asking. The Group That Wants It Says It's Not a Robocall Because a Person Presses the Button · Minds, Bodies, and Terawatts

• 0:00
  [Host] This is Minds, Bodies, and Terawatts, where the robocall finally learned to talk back. Reuters reported this week that the Federal Communications Commission is weighing a request to let political groups call your cellphone with an AI-generated voice, no permission asked, before the midterms.
• 0:15
  [Guest] The request comes from Club for Growth, a conservative group that says it will spend about 175 million dollars on this election. It wants a waiver from the law that bans artificial or prerecorded voices on cellphones unless you agreed to the call first.
• 0:30
  [Host] I thought this was settled. After the fake Biden call in New Hampshire, didn't the FCC say AI voices on robocalls are flat-out illegal?
• 0:38
  [Guest] It did, right after that call, and that ruling still stands. The group's argument is that these aren't robocalls at all, because a person starts each dial and the AI only takes over once you pick up.
• 0:51
  [Host] So a human presses the button and the machine does the talking. What does the conversation actually sound like?
• 0:58
  [Guest] The Associated Press says groups could play AI-voice recordings, or run a live language model that holds a conversation with you about the candidates. Club for Growth says that lets it reach more voters, in more languages, and poll them more accurately.
• 1:12
  [Host] And who's pushing back, besides everyone who hates hearing their phone ring?
• 1:16
  [Guest] Anna Gomez, the lone Democrat on the commission, told Reuters it would let a dark money group flood phones with calls nobody agreed to and bring chaos close to Election Day. Her phrase for the content was a deluge of political AI slop.
• 1:31
  [Host] When does this get decided? The election is four weeks out.
• 1:35
  [Guest] Replies to the FCC close October 19, and the AP says the commission could rule by late October. If it says yes, the group has offered a cap of three calls per person every thirty days, with an opt-out.
• 1:48
  [Host] Three calls a month from one group. How many groups are there?
• 1:52
  [Guest] The AP's read is that a yes for one group opens the door to political groups of all stripes. The consumer groups' filing warned it would enrage the 98 percent of the country that owns a cellphone.
• 2:05
  [Host] What's Club for Growth's defense? It must know how people feel about robocalls.
• 2:10
  [Guest] Its president, David McIntosh, says political speech deserves the same treatment as calls about package deliveries, bank accounts and doctor's appointments.
• 2:17
  [Host] Fair enough, my bank doesn't ask permission before it calls about fraud. But one person clicks and a thousand conversations happen, so is that person really the caller?
• 2:27
  [Guest] The FCC is asking exactly that question in the same notice. It bundled in a second petition, from a different filer, asking whether a texting system that uses, in the filer's words, a perfunctory human being for the sole purpose of clicking send, thousands of times an hour, counts as an automatic dialer.
• 2:45
  [Host] Perfunctory human being. That's a job title now.
• 2:48
  [Guest] If that's how these calls work, it's the last job left in the phone bank. The volunteer who used to argue with you about taxes is replaced by a thumb whose purpose is to make the call legally human.
• 3:01
  [Host] But somebody writes the script the AI follows. Doesn't that keep a person responsible?
• 3:06
  [Guest] There is no fixed script. A live model composes each answer on the spot, and the person who pressed the button isn't on the line. If it tells you a candidate will cut your rent, no human ever said that sentence.
• 3:20
  [Host] So who gets fined when it lies?
• 3:23
  [Guest] The organization, under laws against voter deception that the AP says would still apply. The New Hampshire consultant was acquitted of the crime and still faced federal fines. The waiver doesn't erase that; it removes the gate that sits in front of it.
• 3:37
  [Host] Is a consent rule really a safety rule, though? It sounds like a spam rule.
• 3:43
  [Guest] It's both, because it is the one checkpoint that comes before the harm. A fine arrives months after the election. The consent requirement stops the call on the day it matters.
• 3:53
  [Host] The group's point about languages sounds like a real benefit, though. Reaching Spanish-speaking voters who never get called.
• 4:00
  [Guest] It is, and the same model that explains early voting in Spanish can mislead in Spanish. The capability doesn't tell you which one you'll get. The person accountable for it does, and the petition moves that person to a button.
• 4:13
  [Host] So what do I do when my phone rings with a voice that sounds a little too smooth?
• 4:20
  [Guest] Until the FCC rules, that call is still against the rules on a cellphone unless you said yes. The question in Washington this month is whether one thumb on a button turns thousands of machine conversations into something a person said.
• 4:34
  [Host] And if the answer is yes?
• 4:36
  [Guest] Then the only human on the call is the thumb that dialed it, and every campaign that can afford the model gets a voice in your pocket. For more on who answers when an AI agent does the talking, head to unscarcity dot ai. The book is on Amazon, the audiobook is on Spotify. This has been Minds, Bodies, and Terawatts.