> Creating a deep fake of a celebrity hardly counts as expressing your opinions I agree that deep fakes seem an odd and unexpected fit for a dictionary editor'

> Creating a deep fake of a celebrity hardly counts as expressing your opinions I agree that deep fakes seem an odd and unexpected fit for a dictionary editor's word choice made under the obvious constraint of brevity. But I don't get the relevance. To be clear: I don't see what it has to do with the relationship between producing/distributing a deep fake and a) the explicit rights enumerated in the 1st Amendment, b) the implicit rights reserved for citizens by the 1st Amendment being written in the scope of the U.S. Constitution, and c) 200+ years of legal precedent which clarifies the scope of free speech protections of the 1st Amendment.