{"id":185791,"date":"2025-10-02T19:49:08","date_gmt":"2025-10-02T19:49:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/185791\/"},"modified":"2025-10-02T19:49:08","modified_gmt":"2025-10-02T19:49:08","slug":"how-far-can-brands-go-with-ai-before-they-lose-consumer-trust","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/185791\/","title":{"rendered":"How far can brands go with AI before they lose consumer trust?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Mia Zelu has got a life most people would envy. Travelling the world with friends and family dressed in the latest fashions and snagging VIP seats at Wimbledon and heavyweight boxing matches.<\/p>\n

But there\u2019s a twist: it\u2019s all made up. It\u2019s not that she\u2019s staged the photos to fool us like some creators before her \u2013 it\u2019s that she doesn\u2019t actually exist at all. Her entire existence is in bits \u2013 she\u2019s an AI creation.<\/p>\n

It was a revelation that left some of her 166,000 followers in bits too \u2013 wondering who they could actually trust.<\/p>\n

AI creations are also appearing in the pages of high fashion magazines. Just a few weeks ago, another AI creation hit one of the most premium and traditional media channels when Guess made headlines by featuring two hyper-real AI models in Vogue\u2019s August issue. The AI models were created by Seraphinne Vallora, an AI marketing agency which \u201ccreate editorial-level campaigns using AI\u201d.<\/p>\n

ADVERTISEMENT<\/p>\n

The disclosure issued by Vogue \u2013 buried in fine print \u2013 did little to stem the backlash. Readers accused the brands of deception, undermining human creativity and diversity.<\/p>\n

These moments are more than isolated controversies. They mark a turning point in how technology, psychology and commerce collide. They raise a fundamental question for every marketer: how do we use AI to engage without eroding trust?<\/p>\n

AI influencers are not new. In 2016, Lil Miquela, a teenage pop singer from California, hit the headlines after gaining tens of thousands of followers and having her account hacked by a rival. It turned out to be two AI avatars controlled by the same studio.<\/p>\n

In some ways, Lil Miquela\u2019s faux-existence has become normalised as the storyline of her life has continued to play out (in 2020 she broke up with her human boyfriend). She also has her own Wikipedia page which switches between treating her as a fictional and real character.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Lil Miquela<\/p>\n

What has changed since 2016 is the realism, speed of creation and the ease with which anyone with a smartphone can deploy AI influencers. Consequently, people are now hyper aware of AI and the abilities it has, resulting in heightened scepticism in what we see.<\/p>\n

When AI is clearly artificial \u2013 like a talking animal mascot \u2013 audiences treat it as playful branding, as they do Mickey Mouse or the Jolly Green Giant. But when synthetic personas are presented as human without disclosure, it becomes deception.<\/p>\n

Followers can form parasocial relationships \u2013 one-way emotional bonds \u2013 with a figure they believe is real. When the illusion is broken, trust collapses.<\/p>\n

In Australia, consumer trust in AI is already among the lowest globally with a recent report from KPMG<\/a> finding only 30% of Australians believe the benefits of AI outweigh the risks \u2013 the lowest of any other country. This gap between expectation and reality can be potentially reputationally catastrophic.<\/p>\n

The psychology of \u201ccreepy\u201d<\/p>\n

Recent Australian research confirms this tension. A UTS study found audiences were more comfortable engaging with less human-like AI influencers, such as stylised 2D avatars, than with hyper-realistic models, which many found unsettling and \u201ccreepy\u201d.<\/p>\n

This is the uncanny valley effect: when something looks almost human, but not quite, discomfort spikes.<\/p>\n

Yet paradoxically, other studies show anthropomorphism \u2013 the more human qualities AI exhibits \u2013 the more likely people are to adopt it.<\/p>\n

The bridge between these findings is clear: trust is the key variable. If people know what they are dealing with, they are more open. If not, they recoil.<\/p>\n

Legally there is nothing stopping people creating these fictional AI characters (note that using the likeness of a real person such as a celebrity is a potentially fraud area). Australia has no AI-specific legislation.<\/p>\n

Instead, marketers must fall back on the Australian Consumer Law for some guidance:<\/p>\n

Section 18: prohibits misleading or deceptive conduct in trade or commerce;
\nSections 29 and 33: prohibit false or misleading representations about goods or services.<\/p>\n

In other words: if a consumer believes they\u2019re dealing with a person when they are not, and the brand has not disclosed this, the brand could be at legal risk.<\/p>\n

At a minimum, they are in breach of consumer trust, which for many businesses is just as catastrophic given how long that takes to earn and regain.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Sage Kelly \u2013 a real person<\/p>\n

Why this matters for brands<\/p>\n

AI promises cost savings, scale and infinite creative flexibility. But without transparency, it invites:<\/p>\n

Authenticity erosion \u2013 undermining brand heritage and community trust;
\nPrivacy backlash \u2013 when consumers realise they\u2019ve shared personal data with a machine;
\nCredibility collapse \u2013 endorsements from AI lack genuine lived experience;
\nLabour displacement outrage \u2013 empathy for \u201cjobs lost\u201d to AI, amplified by cases like the Guess\/Vogue scenario.<\/p>\n

These aren\u2019t speculative risks \u2013 they are visible in the backlash we\u2019ve already seen.<\/p>\n

Context is everything. In high fashion, audiences expect artifice. Videos and articles about how photoshopped most of the images in fashion mags have been doing the rounds for over 25 years, yet there was still a large backlash to the Vogue\/Guess ads.<\/p>\n

For community-driven brands replacing real people with synthetic ones would undercut decades of credibility. Imagine how you\u2019d feel about those Bunnings ads with their worker testimonials if you found out they were all actually AI avatars, not someone you could find stocking the paint at your local store?<\/p>\n

The safe middle ground? Make AI use explicit, intentional and even stylised. Consumers are more accepting of clearly artificial personas than of hidden mimicry.<\/p>\n

Five guardrails for responsible AI in marketing<\/p>\n

As part of my PhD I studied the relationships people have with AI chatbots. The findings can be extrapolated to inform some best practice guidelines when using AI in a business context:.<\/p>\n

Disclose early and often \u2013 clearly label AI use in every interaction.
\nDesign with intent \u2013 use stylistic cues so consumers recognise synthetic content.
\nUse AI to augment, not replace \u2013 preserve human voices where authenticity is core.
\nRespect likeness rights \u2013 avoid near-replicas of real individuals without consent.
\nAudit the trust equation \u2013 weigh financial savings against long-term brand equity.<\/p>\n

Australians already approach digital content with scepticism. If we don\u2019t build industry-led disclosure standards, every synthetic campaign risks widening the trust deficit.<\/p>\n

AI can enrich creativity, scale and connection \u2013 but only if brands commit to honesty. Deception is the real enemy, not the technology. The brands that embrace transparency now won\u2019t just avoid backlash; they\u2019ll set the standard for trust in the synthetic age.<\/p>\n

\t\t\tSUBSCRIBE<\/p>\n

\t\t\tSign up to our free daily update to get the latest in media and marketing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Mia Zelu has got a life most people would envy. Travelling the world with friends and family dressed…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":185792,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[256,254,255,64,63,118573,118574,105,27616],"class_list":{"0":"post-185791","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-artificial-intelligence","8":"tag-ai","9":"tag-artificial-intelligence","10":"tag-artificialintelligence","11":"tag-au","12":"tag-australia","13":"tag-brand-trust","14":"tag-mia-zelu","15":"tag-technology","16":"tag-vogue"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185791","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=185791"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185791\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/185792"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=185791"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=185791"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=185791"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}