The Scoop: Etsy bans some types of AI content, says it’s become ‘top-three barrier’ to customers

Etsy, which began as a site focused on handmade and vintage items, is cracking down on sellers who use AI to create patterns or recipes.

The news was announced via dual updates, one aimed at customers, the other at sellers.

The one aimed at customers is more philosophical in nature, titled “Creativity and Trust in the Age of AI” and signed by James Ossman, VP of customer operations.

Our marketplace only works when buyers and sellers trust each other. Sellers need clear guidance and confidence that their creativity and craftsmanship will be represented fairly; buyers need to understand what they’re buying and the human involvement behind it. We know we have work to do to uphold this standard on Etsy.

Here’s what we’re committing to today: AI should support our sellers’ creativity and craftsmanship, not replace them. When shopping on Etsy you should always be able to understand the role sellers play in every item.

The missive also outlines clear, understandable rules moving forward: At least one image of an item should be unaltered and against a real background; listings must have human involvement and cannot be purely AI-generated; and items like patterns and recipes cannot be made with AI.

“The care in a hand-thrown mug, the eye behind a vintage find, the skill in a custom graphic design—this is the human touch that brings people to Etsy. Trust lets buyers connect with that creativity and sellers share it with confidence. Our responsibility is to make that trust real. That’s what keeping commerce human means on our marketplace,” the blog post concludes.

On the seller’s side, everything is blunter, including the title: “Important updates to AI use on Etsy.”

The piece is more scannable, including a video overview of new rules. It also includes a length FAQ to help sellers understand the impacts and consequences of the new rules. Finally, a survey promises to inform future work. This piece is also signed by Ossman.

Why it matters: We are living in the age of AI explosion … and the age of AI backlash. People attempting to create AI-generated patterns of craft items has become a popular genre on social networking sites. Spoiler: They never end well.

To maintain their brand integrity, Etsy had to act. They’re very clear in their note to sellers that this is having not just reputational impact, but revenue impact: “Today, many active buyers say they can’t tell which items involve AI-generated content. It’s become a top-three barrier to shopping more often on Etsy. “

Etsy is clear in its communications to sellers and supportive in its communications to buyers. As is so often the case, the devil will be in enforcement. If Etsy can’t get this issue under control, they risk losing not only the core of their brand, but their customers as well.

Moderna’s stock price plummets after leak of cancer vaccine data

It’s a strange situation: Moderna had very good news to report. The use of a new, personalized cancer vaccine, in combination with existing drug Keytruda, was shown to reduce “the risk of recurrence or death in certain melanoma patients by 42% compared with Keytruda alone,” CNBC reported. It also reduced the spread of cancer by 38%. It increased the chance of living without reoccurrence by 12 points compared to just Keytruda.

These are great metrics, not only for the company, but for people with cancer.

Still, Moderna’s stock plummeted 25%.

The main cause, according to analysts, is that the market expected more, potentially inflating the stock price in the weeks ahead of the leak. Additionally, because the data was leaked, Moderna lost its chance to control the message. Even though the data is positive, because it wasn’t a cure for cancer and Moderna didn’t have a chance to contextualize the numbers, the stock cratered.

The stock price rebounded somewhat Friday morning, but was still trading significantly below its pre-leak numbers.

This is a case study in expectations management and what happens when comms can’t get ahead of a story. It isn’t pretty.

Adidas is fighting to prove $1 billion World Cup spend was worth it

Brands around the world, especially athletic brands, pulled out all the stops for this year’s North American World Cup. Adidas alone spent $1 billion (more than the GDP of some nations) on marketing during the games. Now, they must show what it actually did.

Adidas CEO Bjørn Gulden said at an event last year that he doesn’t expect to see payoff right away.

“We have to remember that if we spend 2, 3, 4, 500 million, whatever the number is, it is not for the event. It’s for the future of the brand,” he said.

Analysts believe there could still be significant gains to be made from the World Cup which will show up in third quarter earnings.

Still, proving a direct tie between the eye-popping spend and the outcome could prove difficult, especially when the CEO says only vaguely the investment was for “the future of the brand.”

What does that mean? How are we finding ROI? How do we measure brand perception? These questions are as tricky and as important in marketing as they are in comms.

Courts are forcing social platforms to change — and to pay hefty penalties

Meta has been ordered to pay $25 billion over the way it handled the data of New Mexico residents.

“Facebook’s misrepresentations about users’ control of their data were not isolated incidents, but rather a systematic pattern of deception at the core of Facebook’s business model,” wrote Judge Francis J. Mathew in his ruling.

After decades of Congress threatening to regulate tech giants but actually doing little, states and courts are taking matters into their own hands. And they’re forcing real change through the legal system. In each case, a jury decided the outcome, revealing the simmering anger about the role of tech in modern life.

These companies must show honesty and transparency in their actions moving forward. Being forced to do so by courts wins no brownie points and only damages reputations. Enacting preemptive changes will lead to more positive sentiment than acting after the fact.

Allison Carter is editorial director of PR Daily and Ragan.com. Follow her on LinkedIn.