To the editor: So a blast of AI-generated emails influenced a government agency to decide in favor of the position of the person who organized the campaign to have those AI-generated emails sent (“Southern California air board rejected pollution rules after AI-generated flood of comments,” Feb. 17). That was one person. From what’s been reported, it wasn’t an onslaught of opinions from the people of California — just one person, in addition to a couple of others who confirmed sending letters.
And I’ll wager that nothing will be done about this. That means our public policy, which relies on opinions from constituents, will furthermore be influenced by individuals working with companies to generate AI email blasts. Local, state and federal governments will likely ignore this issue and no laws will be proposed and/or passed to prevent future public monies from being spent by individuals willing to pay for these AI emails. Now, that’s democracy.
James Medina, Long Beach
..
To the editor: Staff writer Hayley Smith’s story about AI-generated emails used in a successful campaign to dissuade the South Coast Air Quality Management District from creating regulations that would discourage the installation of gas-powered appliances was very interesting, but I would welcome more on the legal side of the matter.
Whether generated by AI or not, the use of fake emails with the names of actual people on them, as was reported in several cases that the AQMD checked, should already be illegal. But it should also be illegal to use fictitious names. It’s odd that relevant laws don’t already exist.
Joseph Lardner, Los Angeles
