The question is no longer whether AI can generate video. It can. The question is what that video manages to sell, and there the answer changes depending on what you are selling.

What AI already handles

  • Clean product images, backgrounds, colour variants.
  • Voiceover and subtitles, now good quality in Spanish.
  • Recuts and format adaptations from existing material.
  • Fast message tests, before investing in production.

What it cannot sell

Experience. A generated video did not use the product, does not live anywhere, has no reason for having bought it. In categories where the decision rests on trust, meaning supplements, cosmetics, services or children's products, precisely what triggers the purchase is missing.

Why a local creator beats it on the thing that converts

A generated video can have good light and a correct voice, but it cannot have a recognisable kitchen, an accent that sounds like it is from here, or a situation the viewer has lived through. That is not an aesthetic detail: it is the proof that a real person used the product, and that is exactly what UGC sells. When the brand sells to an audience that buys with suspicion, that proof cannot be substituted.

The disclosure question

Presenting generated content as the testimonial of a real person is misleading, beyond the legal question. The practical rule: if the viewer would feel cheated on discovering the origin, that origin has to be visible.

The model that works today

Hybrid. The real creator brings face, voice and product use; AI brings inserts, format versions and subtitles for other countries. Credibility stays human and multiplication becomes cheap.

Keep reading

Find UGC creators in Argentina →

Frequently asked questions

Does AI replace creators?

Not where trust decides the purchase.

What can it not replicate?

A recognisable scene and a local accent.

Should AI use be disclosed?

If it could be mistaken for a real person, yes.

What is the best model?

Hybrid: human face, automated multiplication.