Martina McBride invokes 'Independence Day' in plea before Senate committee to stop AI fraud, deepfakes. Watch
The "This One's for the Girls" and "A Broken Wing" singer testified in support of the No Fakes Act, a bill that would federally protect an individual's voice and likeness against unauthorized AI deepfakes and vocal clones.
"I think it's important because as artists, we hopefully want to speak the truth," McBride said. "We want to build a relationship with our fans in which they trust us — they believe what we say."
Getting it right: U.S. lawmakers, Nashville music industry members discuss AI
McBride, appearing alongside RIAA Chairman and CEO Mitch Glazier, told the subcommittee that when celebrity deepfakes are used to endorse a product, it can be harmful to the trust between fans and their audience.
"I just realized sitting here that I bought a product, a collagen supplement, off of Instagram the other day, because it had LeAnn Rimes and a couple of other people," she said. "I'm sitting here thinking, 'Oh my goodness. I don't even know if that was really them.'"
"We had a situation, personally, where one of my fans believed they were talking to me, ended up selling their house and funneling the money to someone who they thought was me," McBride continued. "That is so devastating to me to realize that somebody who trusts me could be duped like that."
McBride added that someone who has been impacted by a deepfake could also become angry enough to someday seek retribution against these public figures.
"We're on stages in front of thousands of people," she said. "We're in public places. So it's a danger to the artist as well."
The subcommittee — which includes Chairwoman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., Ranking Member Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. and Senator Chris Coons, D-Del — also saw testimony from witnesses including Consumer Reports Director of Technology Policy Justin Brookman, YouTube Head of Music Policy Suzana Carlos, and National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) Senior Legal Counsel Christen Price.
Deepfakes? Revenge porn? Trump signs bi-partisan Take It Down Act to combat fake intimate images
Audrey Gibbs is a music journalist at The Tennessean. You can reach her at agibbs@tennessean.com.
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Martina McBride invokes 'Independence Day' to stop deepfake fraud
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bob Odenkirk Still Does His Own Stunts in 'Nobody 2' After His Heart Attack — But There's One Big Rule (Exclusive)
NEED TO KNOW Bob Odenkirk speaks to PEOPLE exclusively in the video series My Life in Pictures In his new action-comedy Nobody 2, sequel to the 2021 hit Nobody, the Emmy winner does his own fighting Other stunts, he says, are off the table: 'They don't let me fly through the air' Yes, Bob Odenkirk does his own stunts. Well, almost all of them. 'I do my own fighting. But they don't let me fly through the air," reveals the 62-year-old actor-producer in PEOPLE's My Life in Pictures video series, while discussing the sequel to his 2021 action-comedy Nobody. The powers that be behind Nobody 2 (in theaters today) are 'not dumb,' he quips, when it comes to stunts like high falls or being attached to wires. 'I've had a heart attack,' says Odenkirk. 'I am 62.' It was before that 2021 heart attack, a near-fatal incident on the set of his hit drama Better Call Saul, that Odenkirk decided to take on the action genre with Nobody's director Ilya Naishuller and writer Derek Kolstad. 'This is another strange journey from my career,' he says, looking at photos from decades in and out of the spotlight. 'I had this strange notion that I could do action. I was in pretty good shape.' Saul Goodman, he adds, was 'a character who was never quitting, clever and had a real heart driving him. And I thought, 'All I gotta do is add the fighting to it, and I'm willing to train.' So I trained for years and I found some people who were foolish enough to back me at Universal Studios. And we made a 'big-little' film called Nobody.' Its sequel, from director Timo Tjahjanto, reunites the Emmy winner with costars Connie Nielsen, Christopher Lloyd, RZA and more. It adds Colin Hanks, John Ortiz and Sharon Stone to the action-packed world of Odenkirk's Hutch Mansell, a government assassin-turned-family man. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. 'I love doing the stunts,' admits the comedy veteran. 'The stunts are the closest thing to sketch comedy of anything I've done because there's something about pulling it off. You do the stunt, you have the choreography, you change it, you modify it, you invent things, and then you go behind the camera and watch it. And when it works, everyone laughs.' Odenkirk is aware that Mission: Impossible star Tom Cruise — one year older at 63 — 'does his own stunts,' he says. 'I know, I know. Tom, good for you.' He adds, 'I'm probably not in as good a shape as good, ol' Tom Cruise.' Nobody 2 is in theaters now. Read the original article on People
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Pity poor Dricus du Plessis, the blameless pariah of UFC 319
Dricus du Plessis got about six words into his first answer to the first question at Thursday's pre-fight press conference to promote Saturday's UFC 319 in Chicago. Then the boos shut him down. This poor guy. We don't say that often about the reigning champion in any combat sport. But my god, the look on his face at first. After a few seconds of this he managed to roll with it, laughing it off and letting the crowd have its fun. But those first moments? When he realized the crowd in Chicago was apparently all the way in the corner of undefeated challenger Khamzat Chimaev and passionately aligned against him? My friends, there was a look of surprise and a little bit of pain on the man's face. And when he decided to set the mic down and see just how committed to this bit the press conference crowd really was, it went nearly a full minute before UFC CEO Dana White spoke up to break the spell. If you're DDP in that moment, don't you have to wonder exactly what it is you ever did to these people? Was it winning his first six UFC fights — five of them inside the distance — before claiming the 185-pound title? Was it beating Sean Strickland twice with a submission win over Israel Adesanya, arguably the best middleweight of the last 10 years, sandwiched in between? Was it continually showing up when called upon, facing all comers and generally refraining from embarrassing the sport the way a few of its most established stars have? Maybe his crime is much simpler than that: He's not Khamzat Chimaev. You might not think that Midwestern fight fans would be all-in for a Chechen boogeyman with an Abe Lincoln beard, but they are. The same appears to be true for much of the UFC fan base as a whole. People love this man of few words, about 25% of which are some combination of 'smash' and 'brother.' He shows up with this malevolent grin, like the neighborhood's most worrisome kid getting ready for another wonderful day of pulling the legs off insects. Every person his eyes fall upon, it's like he's automatically doing the math in his head to determine what it would take to lift them off their feet and move them somewhere unkind. Of course fight fans go for that. How could they not? And the fact that he's felt like a champ in waiting for the last several years only increases the gleeful anticipation now that he's on the eve of finally getting his shot. But poor, poor DDP. All he's done is show up and win and still we refuse to believe in him. Every fight it's the same story. OK, we tell ourselves, he might have won the last one. But this one? Surely this is where it stops. Then he hurks and jerks his way to another victory while looking like an alien who's still learning to work the controls on his human suit and we tell ourselves that's all well and good but the next time he won't be so lucky. But this time. Against the terrifying and undeniable force that is Khamzat the Cruel. This time he's in for it, man. We're sure of it. All of which should force us to stop and ask, purely as a fun little thought experiment: What if that's wrong? What if the guy who's cashed as an underdog in three of his last four fights goes out there on Saturday night and does it again? For one thing, it'll crush the spirits of a lot of those gleeful boo-birds who showed up to the press conference. It will also give him victories over every middleweight we've ever branded as 'elite' since the end of the Anderson Silva era. Maybe (just maybe) it will even force us to treat the man with some damn respect. Because, really, what will there be left to say? What could we possibly hate on him for then? The MMA world is looking at him right now like he's a cow being marched off to a highly entertaining ritualistic sacrifice. If he turns out instead to be a bull that gores his way to bloody freedom, wouldn't we then have to admit that we were wrong? I know we hate doing that. But I just don't see any other choice if du Plessis leaves Chicago with the UFC middleweight title still part of his carry-on luggage. Those same people who dedicated a minute of their lives to shutting the man down with boos on Thursday will owe him an ovation that's at least twice as long if he's still standing on Saturday.
Los Angeles Times
7 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
A Word, Please: Debunking em dash myths
For nearly 20 years, Grammar Girl Mignon Fogarty has been tackling grammar myths with the grace and patience this columnist can only aspire to. On her wildly popular podcast and blog, 'Grammar Girl's Quick and Dirty Tips for Better Writing,' she has addressed every entrenched grammar prejudice under the sun, from the myth that says you can't end a sentence with a preposition to the mistaken belief that an adverb between 'to' and an infinitive, as in 'to boldly go,' is a grammar mistake. And for lo these past two decades, as I've repeatedly stooped to petty grammar disputes, I've marveled at her natural magnanimity. So trust me when I tell you it takes a lot to make her say 'I'm so annoyed,' 'It's driving me crazy' and 'Please stop.' She's talking about a language myth that won't die. Perhaps you've heard it: Dashes in a piece of writing prove, or at least make it likely, the piece was written by AI. Fogarty has heard this online a lot, mainly on social media. Based on her experience, she wasn't buying it, so she did some digging. Fogarty couldn't pinpoint exactly where the idea started, but she found the source that likely blasted this belief into the mainstream — a video for a popular podcast that talked about 'the ChatGPT hyphen,' calling it a 'longer hyphen,' and got about 2.5 million views. Remember that Mark Twain quote 'A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes'? Well, that's a good example of how fast misinformation could spread before the internet because, apparently, that wasn't Twain. It was more likely Jonathan Swift. Whoever the source, we know that nonsense travels exponentially faster in the information age. And, as Fogarty explained, the business about dashes being a sign of AI writing is indeed nonsense. 'Em dashes' — the correct term for the punctuation marks setting off this clause — 'are not a sign of AI writing,' Fogarty said. The very idea is kind of silly when you understand how AI writing tools learn. 'So why might AI use a lot of em dashes?' Fogarty wondered. 'And if it does, then how could seeing a lot of em dashes in someone's writing not be a sure sign they've used AI? Well, all the writing you see coming out of tools like ChatGPT are the way they are because they were trained on human writing. The only way em dashes would be in there is if people used them.' In other words, AI's writing habits are humans' writing habits — humans like Emily Dickinson, who famously used a lot of them. That's why em dashes are useless for identifying AI-written text. So instead of trying to learn some secret for spotting AI writing, why not invest that energy in this quick refresher on em dashes? Em dashes, so called because they're about as wide as a lowercase letter m, connect one part of a sentence to another. They're not hyphens, which are about half that width and connect words to other words, prefixes or suffixes. The two main jobs of an em dash are to indicate an abrupt change in sentence structure or tone and to set off parenthetical information. An abrupt change in structure is — well, it's like this. Parenthetical info — examples, related thoughts, etc. — could also go into parentheses, but dashes keep them more prominent in a sentence. Technically, dashes are not for connecting clauses that could stand as their own sentences — this sentence should be broken into two instead of made one with a dash. But that's not so much a rule as an interpretation (mine). Some editing styles put a space on either side of an em dash. Others attach the dash directly to the surrounding words. Either way is correct. If you like em dashes, go ahead and use them. I, personally, am a fan. But if you're evaluating someone else's writing, don't assume em dashes mean they cheated and got AI to do their work for them. You just can't know that from their dashes. — June Casagrande is the author of 'The Joy of Syntax: A Simple Guide to All the Grammar You Know You Should Know.' She can be reached at JuneTCN@
