Has The Bobby Report posted disclaimers about synthetic voices or avatar tools in video descriptions or pinned comments?

1. What the specific search results actually cover — and what they don’t

The documents in your search hit three distinct areas: reporting on a voice-casting choice in King of the Hill ^{[4] [5]}, legal and policy discussion of mandatory synthetic-performer disclosures ^{[2] [6]}, and technical or industry disclosure guidance for synthetic voices ^{[1] [3]}. None of the indexed results reference The Bobby Report, its YouTube channel, or whether it uses pinned comments or description-line disclaimers to flag synthetic voices or avatars — so there is no direct source material to support a claim either way (not found in current reporting).

2. Why that absence matters for your question

Because your question asks about a specific creator practice, the lack of sources mentioning The Bobby Report is decisive under the limits you set: I cannot assert that The Bobby Report has or has not posted such disclaimers unless a cited source documents it. The available reporting instead focuses on general guidance and proposed law that would require conspicuous notices when synthetic performers are used ^{[2] [1]}.

3. What the law and guidelines would expect if disclosures were required

State-level proposals and business analyses indicate a trend toward mandatory disclosures: one legislative memo says any advertisement using a synthetic performer must include a conspicuous disclaimer that it is being used ^[2]. Platform and vendor guidance — for example Microsoft’s disclosure design guidelines — say disclosure is a tool to "reinforce trust" and that context matters; sometimes a minimal or momentary disclosure suffices if context already makes the synthetic nature obvious ^[1]. Legal- and industry-focused writeups discuss disclosure design specifics for synthetic actors and voices in ads and marketing ^[3].

4. How creators and platforms are dealing with synthetic voice/face issues generally

Recent reporting about platform tools and creator safety highlights that AI-generated likenesses are a growing concern: news coverage of YouTube’s new AI tools frames the debate around risks of deepfakes and biometric linking of names to generated faces and voices, which has alarmed creators whose income depends on their likeness ^[7]. That broader context explains why legislators and tech vendors are focusing on require-or-recommend disclosure practices ^{[2] [1]}.

5. Two competing viewpoints in the available sources

One camp — reflected in legislative and business memos — pushes for conspicuous, possibly mandatory disclaimers for any synthetic performer to protect consumers and existing talent ^[2]. Another perspective — present in vendor guidance — accepts nuance: Microsoft’s guidelines say disclosure may be minimal or even unnecessary when the context already makes clear a voice is synthetic, aiming to balance transparency with user experience ^[1].

6. What you can do next to get a definitive answer about The Bobby Report

Because the supplied corpus contains no direct reporting on The Bobby Report’s channel practices, the only way to answer your original query authoritatively is to check The Bobby Report’s own videos and descriptions or authoritative reporting that cites them. Look for recent videos where voice/avatars appear and scan the description and pinned comment for language like "synthetic voice," "AI-generated," or "avatar." If you want, I can draft a short checklist and sample disclosure wording consistent with the cited guidelines ^{[1] [2]}.

Limitations and final note: I relied only on the supplied search results; those sources do not mention The Bobby Report at all, so any claim about its use of pinned comments or description disclaimers would be unsupported by the available reporting (not found in current reporting).