A version of the following public comment was submitted to members of the California State Senate on May 11, 2026.
Senate Bill 1050 (SB 1050) takes a careful regulatory approach that would build on California’s existing advertising framework rather than a wholesale departure from it. Under current state law, it is already unlawful to make untrue or misleading statements in advertising, including unfair or fraudulent business practices that include misleading advertising. SB 1050 takes those longstanding concepts and would apply them to synthetic digital performers, which can closely resemble real people, by specifying when disclosures about that fact are required.
In this sense, the bill does not redefine deception in California. It identifies a particular kind of omission, the failure to reveal that a seemingly human performer is in fact not a real person, and treats that omission as within the reach of existing false advertising standards. Similar evolutions have occurred before as advertising formats have changed, such as when guidance developed around endorsements and testimonials in broadcast and online media. At the same time, there is value in carefully tailoring disclosure obligations to situations where the speaker’s identity is likely to matter to a reasonable consumer, rather than imposing requirements in all cases.
When thinking about SB 1050, it is important to consider how “real customer” or “real client” style ads already work under advertising law. California does not require every ad to say “these people are actors.” The concern arises when an ad is presented so that viewers reasonably think they are seeing actual customers or clients describing their own experience, when in fact the people are performers who have never used the product or service, such as a prescription drug or a legal service. In those cases, disclosures like “dramatization” or “actor portrayal” are used to correct that impression and make clear that the scene is not a real depiction of a customer’s experience. But these disclosures do not exist to warn viewers that actors exist in advertising.
With that in mind, SB 1050 could be revised so that disclosure would only be required when a synthetic performer is being used in a similar way, for example, in a realistic “real client” or “real customer” style ad. The underlying concern in those scenarios is that the advertisement is presenting a believable depiction of a service or outcome, and viewers may reasonably assume they are watching a real person whose experience or professional status they can rely on. A targeted rule would therefore require disclosure that the performer is synthetic when the ad is framed to look like a genuine testimonial or professional endorsement, rather than in every possible use of a synthetic persona.
SB 1050 recognizes a genuine issue in modern advertising and takes a useful step toward addressing it. With a modest revision to focus the disclosure duty on testimonial and “real client” style uses of synthetic performers, the bill would better track existing advertising practices while still guarding against the kinds of depictions most likely to mislead consumers.