Faked Nancy Pelosi videos, slowed to make her appear drunk, spread on social media | TribLIVE.com
Politics Election

Faked Nancy Pelosi videos, slowed to make her appear drunk, spread on social media

The Washington Post
1200208_web1_1198369-cef1c51898ef40bb9cb013d7a9af98a6
AP
Distorted videos of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., altered to make her sound as if she’s drunkenly slurring her words, are spreading rapidly across social media, highlighting how political disinformation that clouds public understanding can now spread at the speed of the web.

Distorted videos of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., altered to make her sound as if she’s drunkenly slurring her words, are spreading rapidly across social media, highlighting how political disinformation that clouds public understanding can now spread at the speed of the web.

The video of Pelosi’s onstage speech Wednesday at a Center for American Progress event, in which she said President Donald Trump’s refusal to cooperate with congressional investigations was tantamount to a “coverup,” was subtly edited to make her voice sound garbled and warped. It was then circulated widely across Twitter, YouTube and Facebook.

One version, posted by the conservative Facebook page Politics WatchDog, has been viewed more than 1.4 million times, been shared more than 32,000 times, and garnered 16,000 comments with users calling her “drunk” and “a babbling mess.”

The original video was shared by C-SPAN. Skip to 6:02 to begin where the WatchDog clip starts.

The origin of the altered video remains unclear but its spread across social media comes amid a growing feud between congressional Democrats and Trump. In addition to links from multiple YouTube and Twitter accounts, the video has appeared in the comments sections of message boards and regional news outlets.

Analyses of the video by Washington Post journalists and outside researchers indicate that the video has been slowed to about 75 percent of its original speed. To possibly correct for how that speed change would deepen her tone, the video also appears to have been altered to modify her pitch, to more closely resemble the sound of her natural speech.

The altered video’s spread highlights the subtle way that viral misinformation could shape public understanding in the run-up to the 2020 election. Spreaders of misinformation don’t need sophisticated technology to go viral: Even simple, crude manipulations can be used to undermine an opponent or score political points.

Clipping politicians’ speech into videos designed to undermine or embarrass them is nothing new. But the outright altering of sound and visuals signals a concerning new step for falsified news, as presidential campaigns and their supporters battle to boost political messages and influence people online.

“There is no question that the video has been slowed to alter Pelosi’s voice,” said Hany Farid, a computer-science professor and digital-forensics expert at University of California, Berkeley.

“It is striking that such a simple manipulation can be so effective and believable to some,” he added. “While I think that deepfake technology poses a real threat,” he said, in reference to more sophisticated computer-altered videos, “this type of low-tech fake shows that there is a larger threat of misinformation campaigns – too many of us are willing to believe the worst in people that we disagree with.”

Owners of the Politics WatchDog page and representatives from Facebook, Twitter and YouTube did not respond to requests for comment. Pelosi’s office declined to comment.

Pelosi’s voice was distorted in a separate YouTube video, posted earlier this month by a conservative channel with more than 28 million total views. That video slowed a speech Pelosi had given to the American Road & Transportation Builders Association to make her words sound notably slurred. That video appeared to be a version of another video with roughly 200,000 views, in which a man laughed over of a spliced montage of her speech. The original audio shows no such distortion.

Such minor manipulations have become a growing obstacle for covering and understanding Washington. In November, a video of CNN reporter Jim Acosta holding onto a microphone while a White House intern attempted to retrieve it was subtly altered to make the altercation look more dramatic. The edited clip, originally shared by a creator of conspiracy-theory videos, was then shared widely across social media, including by White House press secretary Sarah Sanders.

Pelosi has been the target of similar efforts before. A video last year from The Next News Network, a conservative YouTube channel with more than 1 million subscribers, said Pelosi was “fumbling” her speech because she was drunk or “pretty sick.”

A YouTube channel called The American Mirror posted a video saying Pelosi garbled her words and suffered an “awkward 5-second brain freeze” at a speech earlier this month. That channel, which is almost entirely dedicated to videos crafted to criticize or embarrass female Democratic leaders such as Pelosi and Hillary Clinton, has more than 30 million total views. Both channels did not respond to requests for comment.

Categories: News | Politics Election
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.