Former CNN anchor Jim Acosta, once known for his combative exchanges with President Donald Trump, has sparked outrage again — this time for an interview that raises serious ethical questions about journalism, technology, and political advocacy.
Acosta recently conducted an “interview” with Joaquin Oliver, a victim of the 2018 Parkland school shooting. The problem? Oliver died in that shooting. Acosta wasn’t speaking with the young man. He was speaking with an AI-generated bot created by Oliver’s parents to push for stricter gun control laws.
During the segment, Acosta posed questions to the AI bot, including what his solution would be for gun violence. “Oliver” responded with a scripted statement:
“I believe in a mix of stronger gun control laws, mental health support, and community engagement. We need to create safe spaces for conversations and connections, making sure everyone feels seen and heard. It’s about building a culture of kindness and understanding.”
Acosta replied, “I think that’s a great idea, Joaquin,” as though speaking with the real person.
On social media, Acosta promoted the interview, calling it “one of a kind.” He wrote:
“I’ll be having a one-of-a-kind interview with Joaquin Oliver. He died in the Parkland school shooting in 2018. But his parents have created an AI version of their son to deliver a powerful message on gun violence.”
A show you don’t want to miss at 4p ET / 1p PT. I’ll be having a one of a kind interview with Joaquin Oliver. He died in the Parkland school shooting in 2018. But his parents have created an AI version of their son to deliver a powerful message on gun violence. Plus Texas State… pic.twitter.com/mbdM2WxwUR
— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) August 4, 2025
The backlash was swift and bipartisan. While conservatives condemned the segment as “ghoulish,” even some of Acosta’s usual allies on the liberal-leaning platform BlueSky were unsettled by the ethics of using an AI recreation of a deceased teenager as a vehicle for political messaging. The outcry was significant enough that Acosta quickly disabled replies on his X (formerly Twitter) post promoting the interview.
Jim Acosta turned off replies on Twitter for his ghoulish act of talking to AI Ghosts. Let’s see how the replies are going over on BlueSky. https://t.co/qunaYOGWLu pic.twitter.com/uCkIAzf2V2
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) August 4, 2025
This incident isn’t simply about one journalist’s bad judgment. It highlights a deeper problem: the merging of political advocacy with emerging AI technology, especially when the deceased — who cannot consent — are brought into the debate as mouthpieces for modern policy fights. Whether Acosta viewed this as groundbreaking journalism or a new way to advance the Democrats’ gun control agenda, the ethical line crossed here is undeniable.
If this is the trajectory political media is heading toward — using AI versions of the dead to make their case — it raises troubling questions about where journalism ends and propaganda begins. What Acosta did wasn’t a one-off stunt; it reflects a growing willingness by Democrats and their media allies to normalize AI as a tool for pushing policy agendas, even if it means resurrecting the dead to say things they never actually said.
That should alarm every American, no matter their politics. If using AI-generated “voices” of victims to sway public opinion is acceptable now, what will stop partisans from using this same technology to rewrite history, silence dissent, or manufacture “testimony” that fits their narrative? Acosta’s interview wasn’t just inappropriate — it was a warning of how far the line can move when accountability disappears.