The Slop Shop

The visual-effects team Corridor Crew buys products sold with AI-made pictures, to see what turns up. A shirt sold as linen. On camera: "It's not linen… this is a polyester fabric." A robe listed as linen: "This is not organic linen." And the footage of the seller's warehouses, one of them said, was "AI generated, too." Watch: Corridor Crew (their own channel), the shirt, 2:01 to 2:07 (2:01 to 2:07). Watch: Corridor Crew (their own channel), the warehouses, 2:20 to 2:22 (2:20 to 2:22). Watch: Corridor Crew (their own channel), the robe, 4:31 to 4:34 (4:31 to 4:34).

In Britain, the advertising regulator, the ASA, has ruled on ads like these. A robot puppy advertised on Meta: the ad's puppies "appeared to be of real and/or AI-generated puppies", and the seller "provided no evidence" of what the toy could do.

The ASA's ruling on WiggyDog, a paid-for Meta ad seen in January 2026, upheld on 22 complaints: "the scenes in the video in the ad, which appeared to be of real and/or AI-generated puppies, also gave the impression that the product was highly realistic and lifelike"; "WiggyDog provided no evidence regarding the functionality and appearance of the toy." The outcome: "The ad must not appear again in the form complained of."

A hose nozzle advertised on YouTube and online: the product images in two of its ads "appeared to have been at least partially generated by artificial intelligence, and differed both from each other and from the product shown in" its YouTube ad. Both rulings: upheld. The ads were banned.

The ASA's ruling on Aquoxis, three ads seen in April 2026, upheld on 5 complaints; the advertiser did not respond to the ASA's enquiries; "The ad must not appear again in its current form." "Banned" is the ASA's own description of upheld rulings ("where ads are banned"). A third ruling this year, on ShroomIQ (22 April 2026, 2 complaints), was upheld on health claims, not on its pictures; its own disclaimer called its product visuals "AI-generated representations used for illustrative and branding purposes only".

In America, we found no action yet by the Federal Trade Commission on AI-made product pictures specifically.

That is as far as our search reached, and we say so. The nearest actions: the Cox Media Group "Active Listening" orders (finalised 27 August 2026, $930,000), about false claims for an AI ad service, not images; and Operation AI Comply (September 2024). Loeb & Loeb, 3 August 2026: "there's no case directly on point". 'Only one regulator' is our finding, not a fact about the world: Canada's Ad Standards has no dedicated framework for AI-generated advertising (via Daily Hive); nothing found from the ACCC or a NAD decision.

The picture used to be proof. Now, ask what's in the box.

What we couldn't confirm: That no regulator outside Britain has ruled (we found none). The fabric of the shirt and the robe beyond the testers' judgement by eye.