The following is a guest post and opinion of Manouk Termaaten, Founder and CEO of Vertical Studio AI

Governments are using AI for disinformation—an unethical, authoritarian use with grave implications for freedom and truth around the world.

The fact that nation-states use AI for disinformation has major implications for freedom of thought, free elections, and the sovereignty of nation-states from foreign adversaries. Governments all over the world are using this technology to keep populations in a constant state of confusion.

China, for instance, has been accused by Taiwan of employing generative AI to litter the island nation with disinformation. According to the island’s National Security Bureau, the goal is to divide Taiwan’s public. Taiwan views the action as yet one more attempt to undermine its sovereignty.

In a report sent to parliament, the country’s security bureau claimed it had discovered over half a million “controversial messages” in 2025 already, most of which were on Facebook and TikTok.

“As the application of AI technology becomes more widespread and mature, it has also been found that the Chinese Communist Party has been using AI tools to assist in the generation and dissemination of controversial messages,” the report said.

Many other examples of nation-states using AI for disinformation purposes persist.

In 2024, Russia’s state-backed Pravda Network inundated the World Wide Web with 3.6 million fake articles. The goal? To manipulate AI models to adopt pro-Kremlin narratives and thereby influence public opinion. Clearly, Russia sees AI as a way to promote its propaganda and has even targeted U.S. citizens.

China also exercised influence via AI over Taiwan’s 2024 election, in which China-based operations created AI-generated deepfake videos to spread disinformation, including a contrived history of outgoing leader Tsai Ing-wen. Microsoft called it the first known example of a nation-state using AI material to affect the outcome of a foreign election.

In the 2020 U.S. presidential election, Iran used AI-driven trolls to create targeted disinformation campaigns to destabilize U.S. democratic processes. These efforts led to two Iranian nationals being charged for cyber-enabled disinformation threats and campaigns.

In 2023, Venezuelan state media employed AI tools to manufacture deepfake videos with AI-generated news anchors for a fake English-language channel meant to spread pro-government propaganda and improve the Venezuelan regime’s image at home and abroad.

Slovakia’s 2023 election saw AI-generated audio released falsely depicting a phone call between a journalist and the leader of the Progressive Slovakia political party in which election rigging is discussed. The deepfake circulated ahead of the election and is thought to have led to the party’s loss in the election.

The U.S. is also engaging in such practices with a public investment in “cognitive warfare,” China claims. The Chinese government claims that AI bot networks are spreading false claims and disinformation to harm China’s reputation.

There are obviously major concerns with the use of AI by nation-states to interfere with the political processes of other nations. It is a huge affront to individual liberty by affecting people’s thoughts and decisions. Nation-states can use AI as a tool for propaganda to expand their power, limiting individual rights.

AI used in this manner undermines the free marketplace of ideas. It stamps out open debate in favor of government narratives, distorting political processes and preventing honest electoral outcomes.

The use of AI by governments is just another example of those in authority abusing their power. Except now, AI raises the stakes, making governments able to trick not only their own populations but populations abroad into believing untruths. It’s a slippery slope toward totalitarianism.

Misinforming individuals is a form of coercion, and populations must recognize this tactic and not fall for the deceptive practices being waged by governments against citizens.

Paul Atkins officially took office as the 34th US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chairman on April 21.

This marks a return to the agency for Atkins, who previously served as an SEC Commissioner from 2002 to 2008 during the George W. Bush administration.

In his return to the SEC, Atkins stated that he was honored by President Donald Trump and the US Senate’s confidence in him. He pledged to uphold the agency’s mission to support capital formation, protect investors, and maintain fair and efficient markets.

He emphasized his commitment to making the US a top destination for global investment and promised to collaborate with other commissioners and SEC professionals to achieve that goal.

Turning point for crypto

Atkins is widely seen as more favorable toward digital assets than his predecessor, Gary Gensler. During his Senate confirmation hearing, Atkins highlighted crypto regulation as one of his key priorities, a stance welcomed by many in the blockchain space.

Atkins’ appointment is expected to build on the several crypto-forward moves under acting Chair Mark Uyeda.

Notably, Uyeda recently led efforts to form a crypto-specific task force, withdrew a series of enforcement cases involving blockchain firms, and ordered a fresh review of existing crypto policies.

Meanwhile, the new SEC Chair has notable exposure to the sector. He holds an estimated $6 million in crypto-related investments, including nearly $1 million in equity in two blockchain companies and $5 million in a crypto investment fund.

What does the community expect from Atkins?

Considering Atkins’ pro-crypto disposition, industry leaders view his appointment as a possible inflection point for the emerging industry.

Pierre Rochard, CEO of the Bitcoin Bond Company, believes Atkins’ pro-market approach could support the approval of Bitcoin-backed securities. He said that a competitive US capital market would benefit such financial products.

Nate Geraci, President of the ETF Store, shared a similar view. He anticipates the SEC may begin making progress on long-stalled crypto ETF rule change applications.

Geraci pointed to potential decisions on in-kind creations, redemptions, and Ethereum staking structures as early indicators of policy direction under Atkins’ leadership.

Mentioned in this article