AI and council elections: A boost or a noose for candidates? – Editorial

Rotorua Lakes Council’s local election candidates have shared mixed views on the use of AI in campaigning. Photo / 123RF

Editorial

• AI is increasingly used in political campaigns for tasks like research and design.
• Experts warn of AI’s potential to produce unreliable content and reinforce stereotypes.
• Council candidates have been urged to disclose AI use.

“AI will not replace humans, but those who use AI will replace those who don’t.”

The words of former IBM chief executive Ginni Rometty aren’t quite as ominous as things others have said on the topic; Elon Musk, who once referred to AI (artifical intelligence) as “summoning the demon”, said it would be the best or worst thing ever for humanity.

Since saying that, of course, Musk has launched his own AI chatbot, Grok, presumably with the goal of being the best thing ever for us all.

The benefits of AI in general are numerous. And with the pace of technology, most benefits are yet to be seen.

But caution is warranted.

Any one of us who has used AI will have at some stage had a less than accurate, sometimes even hilarious, response. Is AI still grappling with how many fingers are on a hand?

So warnings from experts this week are timely.

As candidates count down to the start of voting in local elections, there will be many who turn to AI – be it for helping with campaign statements, research, design, checking or more.

One Hastings mayoral candidate even used it to come up with a bold plan for a new city library.

Steve Gibson said he used AI to generate a concept image of the library with five levels of apartments above it.

“Of course, it’s only an idea and the AI drawing might be a little crude, but it beats paying $100,000 to a consultant to come up with the same thing,” he said.

Said consultant might well disagree. But the example highlights the willingness of those seeking public office to give AI a go.

A University of Waikato AI expert said she had observed a rise in generative AI use in political content.

Dr Bronwyn Isaacs said while she saw positives in AI-generated content, it remained a delicate balance.

She said the danger was relying too much on tools that hallucinated and made recommendations based on poor sources of evidence.

A survey of Rotorua Lakes Council candidates threw up mixed views.

One said he was not using generative AI “in any form” and hoped no other candidate was.

Others said they were using it for research, spelling, grammar, logo-making, website creation and video editing.

One was concerned AI would reduce candidates’ capacity for critical thinking, while others were worried AI might make candidates appear more literate and coherent than they really were.

In the end, it comes down to trust and that delicate balance mentioned above. Because those of us casting a vote for our representatives want to know they’re presenting true pictures of themselves. Less artificial, more intelligence.

But at the same time, we want forward-thinking types willing to try new things for the best results.

And if Ginni Rometty is right, the future belongs to the latter. The geek shall inherit the Earth.

Sign up to the Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.