As of 2 August 2026, businesses must comply with new transparency requirements for AI-generated content. Artificial intelligence has become an everyday tool: it is used to write social media posts, generate images and videos, create advertising campaigns and even synthesize voices. But this raises an important question – does the audience have the right to know when content has been created with the help of AI?
From 2 August 2026, the European Union begins applying the transparency obligations set out in Article 50 of the EU AI Act. These requirements impose specific obligations on both AI system providers and organisations or individuals using AI systems in a professional context. Continue reading to discover what marketing and communications professionals should know and consider.
1. Does all AI-generated content have to be disclosed?
The AI Act does not require every text drafted with ChatGPT or every AI-generated image to be labelled “Created with AI”. Instead, it defines specific situations in which organisations using AI systems must inform the public about AI involvement.
For social media and communications professionals, two categories are particularly relevant: deepfakes, and AI-generated or AI-manipulated text concerning matters of public interest when published to inform the public and not covered by the exemption for human review or editorial oversight.
In practice, this means businesses do not need to label every Instagram post simply because AI was involved in its creation. The key question is not “Was AI used?” but rather “Does this specific content fall under the transparency requirements of Article 50?”
2. The greatest attention should be paid to content that looks real
AI can create highly realistic images, voices and videos. This also represents one of the most important areas addressed by the regulation. For example, a company could create a video featuring its CEO, a public figure or an event that never actually happened. If such content appears authentic, it may qualify as a deepfakes,and must be disclosed when published.
This is particularly relevant when creating AI-generated images or videos of people, synthetic voices, face or voice transformations, fictional versions of real events, or virtual humans designed to resemble real individuals. However, not every AI-generated image, voice or virtual character automatically qualifies as a deepfakes, The key consideration is whether the content could create the impression that it is authentic.
The European Commission has also introduced dedicated icons that can be used to indicate AI-generated content. While these icons are not the only possible solution, any disclosure must be clear, visible and easy for people to understand.
3. Human review becomes increasingly important
For communications professionals, one of the most important provisions concerns AI-generated text about matters of public interest. If such content is reviewed, edited, adapted or otherwise subject to meaningful human oversight before publication, and a specific individual or organisation takes responsibility for publishing it, the labelling requirement under Article 50(4) does not apply.
However, this does not mean that a superficial glance at AI-generated text is enough. Human involvement must be genuine and substantive. AI can assist in content creation, but responsibility for published content remains with people. For this reason, organisations should establish clear internal policies requiring human review before publication.
4. Responsibility does not rest solely with the AI provider
One common misconception is: “We only use ChatGPT, so compliance is the provider’s responsibility.” The AI Act clearly distinguishes between AI providers and AI deployers. A business that uses AI systems professionally may itself become subject to regulatory obligations.
For example, AI providers have their own responsibilities, including requirements related to machine-readable marking of AI-generated content. Businesses using these systems may separately be required to inform audiences about deepfakes, or certain AI-generated texts.This means organisations must understand not only which AI tools they use, but also how and why they use them.
5. Failure to comply with the requirements of Article 50 may result in significant penalties
The AI Act is not a set of recommendations. EU Member States are required to establish effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties for non-compliance. For violations of the transparency obligations under Article 50, the maximum administrative fine can reach up to €15 million or 3% of a company’s total worldwide annual turnover from the previous financial year, whichever is higher. For SMEs and startups, lower maximum thresholds apply, based on the lower of the applicable fixed amount or percentage.
At the same time, this does not mean that every incorrectly labelled social media post automatically results in a fine. Enforcement authorities will consider factors such as the nature, severity and duration of the infringement, as well as the degree of responsibility involved.
Technology will continue to evolve faster than regulation
Digital marketing and AI expert, entrepreneur, keynote speaker and international bestselling author of AI OR DIE, Alexander Morad, comments: “The AI Act is inevitable, but regulation alone will never be enough to control AI because technology develops far faster than legislation. My biggest concern is that the European Union may regulate faster than it innovates. Excessively complex or expensive compliance requirements could create disadvantages for startups, while larger organisations with legal teams and compliance budgets gain an advantage.
For marketing teams, AI literacy is far more important than bureaucracy. A ChatGPT subscription alone is not enough — businesses must also invest in proper employee training. AI is increasingly becoming infrastructure rather than just another tool. The question is no longer whether to use AI, but how. In my view, the AI Act is not a finish line. It is more like a set of guardrails that may slightly slow down technological development. Technology will continue to evolve, and regulation will always be trying to catch up.”
What should businesses do right now?
The new regulation does not mean organisations should stop using AI. However, there are several practical steps businesses can take today:
- Identify where AI is being used across the organisation.
- Ensure meaningful human review before publishing content.
- Pay close attention to potential deepfakes, content.
- Establish clear internal guidelines for AI use.
AI content: less uncertainty, more transparency
The new requirements do not mean businesses must add “Created with AI” to every social media post. The purpose of the AI Act is to ensure that people can recognise content that may mislead them about its origin or authenticity. That is why the primary focus is on deepfakes, certain publications concerning matters of public interest and other situations where transparency is particularly important.
For organisations, this means introducing new principles into their communication practices. Using AI is not the problem. The problem arises when people cannot understand what they are seeing, hearing or interacting with.This is the moment for businesses to take transparency, trust and human accountability more seriously when using AI.
Keeping up with the latest developments is more important than ever. That is why marketing and business professionals should not miss the opportunity to attend Alexander Morad’s masterclass, “Power of AI Skills: Become a Future Marketing Leader,” taking place in Riga on 8 October 2026. Participants will learn how to stay ahead of emerging trends, experiment with new approaches and build their professional future alongside AI — with practical, actionable insights and no unnecessary hype. Learn more about the event here!
Sources of information used in the preparation of this article:
EN 
LV