AI-Generated Deepfake Video Used in Presidential Harassment Campaign Against Journalist in Argentina

The article explicitly mentions an AI-generated video used to spread false and harmful content about a journalist, which has been widely disseminated and supported by a political figure, leading to harassment and threats. This meets the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm to a person (reputational and psychological harm) and harm to communities (erosion of freedom of expression and increased risk of violence). The involvement of AI in generating the defamatory video is central to the harm described, not merely background information or potential future risk.

The article explicitly mentions an AI-generated defamatory video that falsely accuses a journalist of incest, which has been widely circulated and led to public harassment and incitement by a political figure. The AI system's role in creating harmful false content directly led to reputational harm and increased risk of violence, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights and harm to communities. The president's amplification of the content further intensifies the harm. Hence, this is not merely a potential risk or complementary information but a realized AI Incident.

The article explicitly mentions an AI-generated fake video used to falsely accuse a journalist, which has circulated widely online. The president's active participation in amplifying this campaign, even if he did not share the video itself, contributed to the harm. The harm includes reputational damage, threats, and a chilling effect on press freedom, constituting violations of human rights and harm to communities. The AI system's role in generating the fake content is pivotal to the incident, meeting the criteria for an AI Incident.

The event involves the use of AI to generate manipulated videos used in a campaign of harassment and discrediting against journalists. The AI-generated content is a direct factor in the harm caused, including threats, intimidation, and erosion of press freedom. The president's amplification of these AI-generated attacks further exacerbates the harm. The harms include violations of human rights (freedom of expression and press), intimidation, and increased risk of violence, fitting the definition of an AI Incident as the AI system's use has directly led to harm.

An AI system was explicitly involved in generating a false video used to attack a journalist, which was widely disseminated and amplified by the president and his followers. The resulting harm includes reputational damage, misogynistic insults, and potential threats of physical aggression, fulfilling the criteria for harm to communities and violations of rights. Therefore, this event qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct role of AI-generated content in causing harm.

The mention of an AI-driven campaign of discredit against a journalist implies the use of AI systems to generate or amplify harmful content, which directly harms the journalist's rights and potentially the broader community by eroding press freedom and increasing violence risk. This constitutes a violation of human rights and harm to communities, fitting the definition of an AI Incident.

The event explicitly involves the use of AI systems to create deepfake videos that have caused direct harm to a person, including emotional distress, reputational damage, and threats to personal safety. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm to a person and violations of rights. The involvement of AI in generating the harmful content and the resulting real-world consequences confirm this classification.

The article explicitly mentions the use of AI to create deepfake videos that have been used in a campaign of hate and misinformation against Julia Mengolini. These videos have caused her severe emotional distress and threats, which are direct harms to her health and rights. The AI system's outputs (deepfake videos) have been used maliciously, leading to realized harm. Therefore, this event meets the criteria for an AI Incident due to the direct harm caused by the AI-generated content.

The article explicitly states that videos created with AI were used in a campaign of digital torture against Julia Mengolini, including false and pornographic content. This AI-generated content has led to real harm: psychological distress, threats, and the need for personal security measures. The AI system's use in generating harmful deepfake videos directly caused harm to the individual, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under the OECD framework.

The event explicitly involves the use of AI to create deepfake videos, which are a form of AI-generated content. These videos have been used maliciously to harass and defame the journalist, causing emotional and reputational harm. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm to a person (emotional distress, harassment) and violations of rights (defamation, harassment). The involvement of AI in generating the harmful content and the resulting realized harm clearly classify this as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article explicitly states that false videos were created using artificial intelligence (deepfake technology) and spread to harass and harm the journalist Julia Mengolini. The harm is realized and significant, including emotional distress and reputational damage, which fits the definition of an AI Incident under violations of rights and harm to communities. The involvement of AI in generating the harmful content and its role in the campaign of harassment is direct and central to the incident. Therefore, this event qualifies as an AI Incident.

The event explicitly mentions the creation and dissemination of videos generated with artificial intelligence that caused psychological torture and public harm to the journalist. The AI system's use in fabricating false and harmful content directly led to realized harm (psychological, reputational, and social) and violations of rights. The involvement of state actors and the President in promoting this attack further aggravates the harm and legal implications. This fits the definition of an AI Incident as the AI system's use directly led to significant harm and rights violations.

The event explicitly mentions the creation and viral spread of a video made with artificial intelligence that falsely portrays a person in a damaging and intimate scenario. This use of AI-generated deepfake content has directly led to harm, including threats and social harassment, which constitute violations of rights and harm to the individual and community. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework, as the AI system's use directly caused significant harm.

The article explicitly mentions the use of AI to create false videos that were widely spread, resulting in threats and intimidation against the victim. The AI-generated content directly contributed to harm to the journalist's personal safety and dignity, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident. The harm is realized, not just potential, and involves violations of rights and harm to the community through disinformation and harassment. Hence, the classification as AI Incident is appropriate.