AI disclosure is increasingly promoted and sometimes required as a route to transparency, accountability, provenance, and trust. Yet disclosure can also expose AI users to suspicion, stigma (e.g., competence penalties), and surveillance, affecting minoritized groups in particular. This paper reports on Who Bears the Cost of Honesty?, a CRAFT workshop at the 2026 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency that used scenario-anchored power mapping and design fiction to explore the benefits, harms, tensions, and power asymmetries that emerge under AI disclosure norms and mandates. We document the workshop design and analyze the disclosure approaches participants co-created, comprising four completed power maps, three context cards, and one interface prototype. These artifacts span education, workplace, politics/journalism, and interpersonal contexts. They depict disclosure as a multi-actor accountability process, surface concerns that the use of accessibility-related AI could be held against workers in performance evaluations, and explore how context-specific, bottom-up disclosures may support transparency while mitigating some risks of stigma and misinterpretation. We contribute (1) a documented two-stage workshop method; (2) an artifact-grounded thematic synthesis; and (3) a diagnostic framework, the Cost-of-Honesty Stack, with provisional design suggestions and research directions.
Abstract This study evaluates the role of disclosure transparency in rebuilding trust in journalism amid the increasing integration of generative AI (GenAI) tools in news production. While AI technologies enhance journalistic workflows by automating and augmenting content creation, they also introduce opacity in profes...
Hannes Cools, Sophie Morosoli, L. Naudts et al.· Digital Journalism· 1 citation
Regulators increasingly mandate transparency regarding generative AI (GenAI) use in creative work, aiming to protect audiences from deception while preserving creators' self-expression. One way of achieving this transparency is through disclosure labels that directly inform audiences about GenAI use. Yet, prior researc...
Ekaterina Jussupow, Kevin Bauer, R. Heigl et al.· Information systems research· 0 citations
It is argued that transparency in such settings must be reconstructed as a multi-dimensional condition rather than a single act of disclosure, and the shift from disclosure regulation to transparency governance is necessary if the law is to address persuasion in which the identity of the speaker is itself synthetic.
Manisha J. Singh, Utkarsh Chadha· International Journal of Law...· 0 citations
This study aims to examine how public administrations perceive and govern collaboration with social-media influencers (SMIs), conceptualizing these partnerships as public values trade-offs between platform logics and administrative norms.
Drawing on 19 semistructured interviews with social-media managers in...
R. Zumofen, Vincent Mabillard· Transforming Government: Peo...· 0 citations
Although generative artificial intelligence (genAI) is increasingly integrated into journalistic news reporting, its adoption raises normative questions about news credibility, audience trust, and transparency. While transparency is widely invoked as an ethical safeguard, empirical evidence on audience perceptions of t...
Stephanie D'haeseleer, Kristin Van Damme, Tom Evens· Journalism· 0 citations
BACKGROUND
Despite the proliferation of AI disclosure requirements in academic publishing, recent research suggests a persistent gap between policy expectations and research practice. However, little is known about how researchers perceive and navigate these requirements or what limitations they identify in current dis...
Ayoung Yoon, Siena Oristaglio· Accountability in Research· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.