When AI-generated UGC video is acceptable, and when it is not

The one-question test

Ask of any video: does it claim that someone experienced something? 'I wore these for a month.' 'My kids ate all of it.' 'This fixed my back.' Each of those is a report, and a report implies a reporter. If the reporter is generated, the report is fiction presented as fact.

If the video claims no experience, the question of who is speaking matters much less. 'The sale starts Friday' is equally true from a person, a synthetic presenter or a line of text.

Uses we consider fair

In our editorial view, generated footage is a reasonable choice for these jobs, provided it is labeled where the platform requires.

• Announcements. Dates, openings, restocks, price changes.
• Explainers. How a feature works, how to assemble or set something up.
• Format-led clips with no presenter. A POV sequence, a text-on-screen list, a trend-based Reel.
• Concept tests. Hearing three opening lines before paying anyone to film one.

Uses to avoid

These uses mislead viewers about a material fact. Several are also the kind of thing advertising regulators and platform policies address. This is general guidance, not legal advice.

• Fake testimonials. A generated person saying they bought, used or loved the product.
• Invented customers. A named 'reviewer' who does not exist.
• Result claims. Skin, weight, health, income or any outcome over time, voiced by someone who never had it.
• Likenesses without consent. A real person's face or voice, or a close imitation, used without their agreement.

The gray areas

Some cases sit between. A founder who records once and uses a generated version of themselves, with their consent, to deliver updates is speaking in their own name, and a clear label goes a long way. A generated presenter who reads out a real customer's written review is closer to the line: the words are true, the face is not, and the viewer should be told both.

When in doubt, ask whether a customer who learned how the video was made would feel informed or fooled. If fooled, change the video, not the caption.

A house rule a small team can adopt

Write the policy down before the first video, so that nobody settles it under deadline. Three lines are enough.

• Generated video may explain and announce. It may not testify.
• Any video with a generated person carries the platform's label for AI content.
• Claims about results are filmed by people who had them, and a named person approves every video before it runs.

Link AI on both sides of the line

Link AI by Linkme is our editorial choice because its two video routes fall on the right sides of this line. The video Linkme shows it making itself is a 15-second POV Reel on a trending format. That is format-led content, and nothing in Linkme's description involves a generated presenter. For testimonial and demonstration videos, the route is real creators on Linkme, who are matched to your brief and send what they film.

Link AI is not an avatar generator, so it does not put a synthetic customer on screen. To see both routes with your own product, try Link AI in a demo. For the labels each route needs, read AI UGC video disclosure.

Connected entries

Questions & answers