In 2018, a video of Barack Obama calling Donald Trump a “dipshit” went viral. Such “deepfakes,” AI-generated audiovisual media, are becoming increasingly accessible, even to those with only basic computer skills. The potential spread of deepfakes raises various epistemological and ethical concerns: they might distribute misinformation, gaslight individuals, infringe on personal rights, and undermine the credibility of genuine media. Consequently, some actors, like political parties, have pledged to avoid using deepfakes. However, deepfakes could also have positive uses: law enforcement might use them to infiltrate criminal organizations without risking undercover agents, and the media could illustrate stories when no genuine recordings are available. This raises the question: Is it morally acceptable for well-meaning actors to use deepfakes for positive purposes?

To answer this question, I argue three points. First, some dangers of deepfakes will diminish as they become more common. Second, other dangers depend more on their accessibility than their prevalence. Third, once deepfakes are ubiquitous, we should compare the knowledge from audiovisual media to knowledge from testimony rather than perception. Based on these points, I will present two criteria for whether well-meaning actors should use deepfakes.