WAJD Learning

Module 1 of 2 · 45 minutes

Honest ads, however they are made

By the end of this module you will be able to

  • State that the advertising codes apply to AI generated ads
  • Apply the ASA's disclosure test
  • Explain why disclosure does not rescue a misleading claim
  • Recognise a misleading AI image
  • Say who is responsible for the ad

Work through it

1 interactive for this module, built on the WAJD Teach engine. Nothing moves until you ask it to, and every one has a written version if you would rather read it.

Watch: Emma and George talk it through

3 minutes. Captions are on, and the same conversation is written out in full below. The voices are computer generated.

Emma George, I generate half our ad images with AI now. Are there rules about that?

George No AI rules, and that's the point. The Advertising Standards Authority enforces the CAP Code, which covers your website and social media too. It has no AI specific rules, because the existing ones apply however the content was made.

Emma So what applies?

George Everything that always did. Legal, decent, honest and truthful. Don't materially mislead. Be able to substantiate your claims. The same rules in the same way.

Emma Do I have to label AI images?

George There's no blanket rule. The ASA suggests a question. Is the audience likely to be misled if the use of AI isn't disclosed?

Emma Give me a yes and a no.

George A yes. Your influencer is AI generated and people think she's real. Saying so removes a misleading impression. A no. AI helped write a sentence of copy that's true. Nobody's misled.

Emma So if I'm worried, I just add a label.

George That's the mistake. The ASA says disclosure alone is very unlikely to fix a fundamentally misleading message. You can't make a misleading claim and then disclaim it by saying AI was used.

Emma Example?

George Their own. A cosmetic product. An AI image showing an effect that doesn't reflect real results is likely to be materially misleading. A line saying made with AI doesn't rescue it.

Emma We sell holiday lets. I've been brightening the rooms.

George Brightening is one thing. A room that's larger than the real one is another. If the picture shows what the product is, it has to be what the product is. A label doesn't change that.

Emma What about putting a celebrity's face on it?

George A real person's face or voice, without permission, suggesting they endorse you. That breaks the rules on endorsements and may breach other law too. And an invented customer with an invented quote is a fake testimonial, however lifelike.

Emma If my agency makes it, is it their problem?

George Yours. The advertiser is responsible. It doesn't matter that an agency made it, a tool generated it, or a platform assembled the wording automatically. If it appears as your marketing, the ASA asks you to substantiate it.

Emma Give me one check I can do every time.

George Ask one person who didn't make it. What does this tell you about the product? Then check that what they say is true.

The written material

No special rules, because the ordinary ones apply

The Advertising Standards Authority enforces the CAP Code for non-broadcast advertising, which includes a business's own website and social media, and the BCAP Code for broadcast. Neither contains rules specific to AI. The ASA's position is that the existing rules apply regardless of how content is generated, edited or targeted.

So an AI generated ad must be legal, decent, honest and truthful like any other. It must not materially mislead, it must be capable of substantiation, and it must be socially responsible. The same rules apply in the same way.

When to disclose that AI was used

There is no requirement to label every use of AI. The ASA suggests asking: is the audience likely to be misled if the use of AI is not disclosed? What is the mischief, if any, that the disclosure would prevent?

Where a deepfake is used for obvious comic effect, or an influencer is in fact AI generated, saying so can remove a misleading impression. Where AI helped write a sentence of copy that is true, nobody is misled and nothing needs saying.

Disclosure does not rescue a misleading ad

This is the point most often got wrong. The ASA says disclosure alone is very unlikely to mitigate the harm of a fundamentally misleading message. You cannot make a misleading claim and then disclaim it by adding that AI was used.

Its example is a cosmetic product. An AI generated image showing an effect that does not reflect real results is likely to be materially misleading, and a line saying the image was made with AI does not fix that. The same goes for a before and after picture, a room that is larger than the real one, a meal that the kitchen does not serve, or a product that looks better than it is.

Real people, and who answers for the ad

Using a real person's face or voice without permission, to suggest they endorse a product, breaks the rules on testimonials and endorsements and may breach other law as well. An invented customer with an invented quote is a fake testimonial however lifelike the portrait.

The advertiser is responsible. It does not matter that an agency produced the ad, that a tool generated the image, or that a platform's automatic system assembled the wording. If it appears as your marketing, the ASA will ask you to substantiate it.

Knowledge check

The knowledge check and your certificate need a free account, so that your progress and results can be saved as evidence.

Create a free account Sign in

The learning itself stays free and open. You are reading all of it right now without an account.