Synthetic Politics: Prevalence, Spreaders, and Emotional Reception of AI-Generated Political Images on X
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Despite widespread concerns about the risks of AI-generated content (AIGC) to the integrity of social media discourse, little is known about its scale and scope, the actors responsible for its dissemination online, and the user responses it elicits. In this work, we measure and characterize the prevalence, spreaders, and emotional reception of AI-generated political images. Analyzing a large-scale dataset from Twitter/X related to the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election, we find that approximately 12% of shared images are detected as AI-generated, and around 10% of users are responsible for sharing 80% of AI-generated images. AIGC superspreaders--defined as the users who not only share a high volume of AI-generated images but also receive substantial engagement through retweets--are more likely to be X Premium subscribers, have a right-leaning orientation, and exhibit automated behavior. Their profiles contain a higher proportion of AI-generated images than non-superspreaders, and some engage in extreme levels of AIGC sharing. Moreover, superspreaders' AI image tweets elicit more positive and less toxic responses than their non-AI image tweets. This study serves as one of the first steps toward understanding the role generative AI plays in shaping online socio-political environments and offers implications for platform governance.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 16 Feb 2025.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026GPT-Image-2 in the Wild: A Twitter Dataset of Self-Reported AI-Generated Images from the First Week of Deploymentcited by 8
- 2026The Generative AI Paradox: GenAI and the Erosion of Trust, the Corrosion of Information Verification, and the Demise of Truthcited by 4
- 2026Stateless Yet Not Forgetful: Implicit Memory as a Hidden Channel in LLMscited by 3
- 2026Predicting, Evaluating, and Explaining Top Misinformation Spreaders via Archetypal User Behaviorcited by 0
- 2026ChatGPT Images 2.5 in the Wild: A Launch-Period Dataset and Detector Evaluationcited by 0
- 2026ChatGPT Images 2.5 in the Wild: A Launch-Period Dataset and Detector Evaluation14 Sep 2026
- 2026Predicting, Evaluating, and Explaining Top Misinformation Spreaders via Archetypal User Behavior17 Aug 2026
- 2026GPT-Image-2 in the Wild: A Twitter Dataset of Self-Reported AI-Generated Images from the First Week of Deployment28 Apr 2026
- 2026Stateless Yet Not Forgetful: Implicit Memory as a Hidden Channel in LLMs9 Feb 2026
- 2026The Generative AI Paradox: GenAI and the Erosion of Trust, the Corrosion of Information Verification, and the Demise of Truth1 Jan 2026