Florida lawmakers would require digital content, including election-related media, to carry metadata revealing AI involvement, but it’s costly, hard to enforce, and burdensome for content creators.

A pair of similar bills making their way through the Florida Legislature aims to make AI generated online content more transparent, but big questions loom about enforcement and what would likely be a heavy burden on content creators, social media platforms, and tech companies.

House Bill 369, sponsored by Sarasota Republican State Rep. Fiona McFarland, and Senate Bill 702, sponsored by State Senator Danny Burgess, would require digital content—especially anything related to elections or political candidates—to carry “provenance data.” In simple terms, this means any photo, video, text or audio clip posted online would have to include hidden metadata that shows where it came from, whether it was altered using artificial intelligence, and what tools were used to create or edit it.

The goal of the legislation is to fight misinformation by helping people know whether what they’re seeing is real or has been altered. If a social media post includes an AI-generated image of a candidate, for example, the provenance data could reveal that the image was created using a tool like Photoshop or an AI software program. Digital media companies (including The Capitolist) would be required to keep this data attached to posts and display a special tag or label so users know when AI was involved (note: AI was involved in helping generate this story. In fact, AI is already everywhere, including the Florida Legislature).

The bill also extends to cameras and recording devices, requiring manufacturers to offer an option for automatically embedding provenance data in images and videos. AI companies would have to provide free tools that let users check provenance data themselves.

But despite the good intentions of the bill, tech experts warn that enforcing such rules would be difficult. While major platforms like Facebook or X could theoretically build systems to track and display provenance data, millions of smaller websites, independent creators, and older digital files would be left out. Critics say it could also raise privacy concerns, as metadata tracking could be misused, altered or hacked. Ultimately, unless the public has confidence that the provenance data can be trusted, the money spent on compliance would be wasted.

Very little existing content includes tamper-proof provenance data, meaning bad actors could simply remove or edit files before posting them. The bill doesn’t provide a clear way to prevent people from bypassing the requirements, nor does it address how provenance data could be made unalterable or hack proof.

HB 369 was referred to the House Information Technology Budget & Policy Subcommittee on Feb. 12, where it will face initial scrutiny from state lawmakers when the 2025 Legislative Session begins next month. The Senate version has yet to be assigned a committee.