New York’s AI Ad Disclosure Law Is a Win for Trust, But a Test for Marketers

BodyArmor's Super Bowl ad used AI surrealism against artificial ingredients.

New York’s new law requiring disclosure when advertisements use AI-generated synthetic performers is the kind of regulation marketers should pay attention to, not just because it is first-in-the-nation, but because it signals where the industry is headed.

Some states have proposed going further into general AI‑content disclosure, but these are not yet equivalent to New York’s in‑effect ad law:

• Georgia has introduced bills that would require disclosures when AI‑generated content is used in advertising or commerce, but these are still proposals rather than an enacted, comprehensive advertising law.

• Massachusetts’ proposed Artificial Intelligence Disclosure Act would require generative AI systems to automatically include a clear, permanent disclosure on AI‑generated or modified content, but again this is proposed legislation, not yet in force.

State	AI‑ad disclosure outside politics?	Political‑ad AI disclosure?	Notes
New York	Yes – disclosure for synthetic performers in ads now in effect	Yes – separate law on AI in political media	Only state with broad, sector‑wide ad rule
California	No general ad rule like NY’s	Yes – disclaimer for AI‑generated political ads	Focused on election content, not all advertising
Florida	No general ad rule like NY’s	Yes – AI disclosure for some political communications	Political context only
Others listed (HI, ID, IN, MI, NV, ND, OR, UT, WA, WI)	No broad ad rule like NY’s reported yet	Yes – some form of AI/deepfake disclosure or regulation in political content	Scope and timing vary by state

For years, advertisers have chased efficiency, personalization and speed. AI delivers all three. It can generate talent, localize creative, test concepts and help brands produce more content with fewer resources. But the same power that makes AI useful also creates a trust problem. When consumers cannot tell whether the person in an ad is real, synthetic, modified or entirely fabricated, the relationship between brand and audience starts to erode.

That is where this law gets it right.

The biggest pro is transparency. Audiences deserve to know when they are watching a real performer versus a synthetic one. That does not make AI bad. It simply makes the use of AI visible. For brands, this can actually be a positive. Clear disclosure can show that a company is using technology responsibly instead of trying to pass off artificial performance as human connection.

The law also helps protect creative labor. Actors, performers and creators have been rightfully concerned that AI could be used to replace them without proper consent, compensation or recognition. For an industry built on storytelling, emotion and identity, that matters. A brand cannot claim to value culture while quietly removing the people who create it.

But there are real cons too. The first is operational complexity. Marketers already work across agencies, production partners, media platforms, influencer teams and legal departments. Adding another compliance requirement means brands need clearer internal processes around how AI is used, documented and disclosed.

The second challenge is creative friction. Disclosure requirements may make some brands more hesitant to experiment, especially smaller companies without legal teams. The risk is that responsible innovation becomes slower or more expensive.

The third issue is inconsistency. New York may be first, but it will not be last. If every state creates slightly different AI advertising rules, national campaigns could become harder to manage. Advertisers need to prepare for a patchwork regulatory environment.

Some famous examples of AI-generated Ad Content include:

BodyArmor – “Field of Fake” (Super Bowl)

BodyArmor ran a Super Bowl ad that opens on a bizarre, AI‑generated football stadium filled with distorted players and warped details, deliberately showcasing how fake it looks.The spot then contrasts that synthetic world with real‑life sports footage, using the AI imagery as a narrative device about “real vs fake.”

Cadbury – “#NotJustCadburyAd 2.0”

Cadbury’s #NotJustCadburyAd 2.0 is a campaign that used generative tools to bring personalized celebrity endorsements to thousands of small businesses. The campaign used AI facial mapping and voice modeling to generate custom videos featuring Bollywood star Shah Rukh Khan. Local shop owners could enter their store name and details, and the system produced a version of the ad where Khan appeared to speak about their business.

Rather than releasing one national commercial, Cadbury effectively created tens of thousands of personalized micro-ads. For shop owners, it delivered a high-end promo featuring India’s biggest film star. For Cadbury, it reinforced the brand’s long-standing relationship with local retailers and positioned AI as a tool for empowerment rather than novelty.

Still, the larger lesson is clear: AI is moving from novelty to infrastructure, and marketing needs new rules of engagement.

Three learnings for advertisers:

1. Disclosure is becoming part of brand trust. Do not treat AI disclosure as a legal footnote. Treat it as part of your consumer experience. The brands that are upfront about AI will be better positioned than those that appear evasive.

2. Build AI governance before you need it. Every brand should know when, where and how AI is being used in creative development, production, casting, localization and media. If you cannot track it, you cannot manage the risk.

3. Use AI to enhance creativity, not hide the absence of humanity. AI can be a powerful tool, but advertising still works best when it feels emotionally true. The goal should not be to replace human creativity. The goal should be to expand what human creativity can do.

This law is not the end of AI in advertising. It is the beginning of a more accountable version of it. And for marketers, that may be exactly what the industry needs.