Proof
Hear real calls. Including one that went badly.
Updated
Every call opens by saying it is an assistant, so “do people notice?” is not quite the question — they are told. The question underneath it is whether being told lands badly, and the honest answer is that nobody knows: three rounds of research across nine subreddits where people post about unwanted calls, scams and AI turned up not one person describing a disclosed AI call they had actually received. This page is where our recordings go once each file clears consent-to-publish review, and one of them will always be a call that went badly, labelled as such on the card face.
Do people notice that its an AI Voice agent behind the call?
That is the question verbatim, typo and all, as a salesperson asked it in r/sales in May 2026. Nobody answered it. It is the most-asked and least-answered question in the category, which is why it is the heading on this page rather than a line in an FAQ.
Our version of the answer starts by removing the premise. There is nothing to notice, because the call says what it is: it says it is an assistant, then it asks why they signed up — and actually listens. Disclosure is settled here, and it is not a concession we argue down to. It is the product.
The sentence we will not write
The disclosure decision stands on two legs, and neither of them needs a claim about how recipients feel. Buyers want it, because the thing that keeps a webinar operator awake is being caught deceiving their own audience. And it removes a whole category of legal exposure — California's B.O.T. Act, the FTC's deception rules, and the AI-disclosure opening the FCC proposed in 24-84 all stop mattering the moment the agent simply says what it is.
| Claim | What actually backs it | Do we publish it? |
|---|---|---|
| The call says it is an assistant | A product decision, settled July 2026. It also closes the bot-disclosure exposure under California's B.O.T. Act and the FTC's deception rules. | Yes — it is a fact about the product, not a result |
| Recipients do not mind a disclosed AI call | Nothing. Across the top 100 posts in nine subreddits where people post about unwanted calls, scams and AI, zero described receiving one. | No. Untested is not the same as fine. |
| It sounds human — you would never know | Nothing we would want to stand behind. It is a sentence built to make a buyer comfortable with deception. | No. Banned in our own copy. |
| A live, conversational call beats an automated one | Parikh 2010, randomised controlled trial, N=9,835: no-show 13.6% live staff vs 17.3% automated vs 23.1% no reminder, all pairwise P<.01. | Yes, with the caveat that the live arm was human staff |
| A disclosed AI call performs like the live arm | Nobody has published on it. This is the bet the product is making. | No. The pilot is how we find out. |
What if someone asks it directly whether it's a bot?
It says yes, because it already said so. There is no clever deflection to design here and no branch in the script that has to be cleverer than the caller — the disclosure happened in the opening, and repeating it costs nothing. The awkward version of this question only exists for products that were hoping the question would not come up.
What we will not do is print the wording here. The exact line is published word for word on what it says, where it belongs, because it is the sentence the whole trust position rests on and it is not a sentence a marketing page should be drafting.
Can I hear a call that went badly?
That is the standing rule for this page, and it is worth stating before there is a single file on it. When recordings go up here, one of them is a call that went badly, labelled as such on the card face — in plain words, visible before you press play, not disclosed after a click and not filed under a euphemism.
The reasoning is not generosity. A reel of good calls tells a buyer that the rest are bad, and a vendor who says nothing has ever gone wrong has either never run volume or is not listening to their own calls. Showing the failure unprompted is the only version of this section that carries information.
So the rule is enforced in code rather than in a style guide: the component that renders this section throws rather than render a set of clips containing none marked as having gone badly, and a cap that would slice the bad call out of view is treated as a build error.
What is on this page right now: nothing
Consent to publish, confirmed per file
Not consent to record — consent to publish, checked one recording at a time. A file that fails is deleted rather than blurred.
Third-party personal information removed
Names, numbers and anything identifying a person who did not agree to appear come out before anything is uploaded.
A verbatim, speaker-tagged transcript
No clip publishes without one. It is what makes the section usable if you cannot or would rather not listen, and it is the part a search engine can read.
The outcome is labelled on the card face
Went well, mixed, or went badly, with a plain-words note saying what happened. For a bad call the note states what went wrong.
Registry order is render order
The grid is never sorted good-first. Sorting by outcome would rebuild the cherry-picked reel this section exists to refute.
What happens when someone swears at it?
We do not have a recording of that to show you, and writing a paragraph describing how gracefully it handles hostility would be inventing the evidence rather than producing it. So here is the part that is actually decided in advance rather than improvised in the moment.
- Off-script means stop, not improvise. A question the assistant cannot answer gets a hard fallback that you defined, not a generated guess. Improvisation is the failure mode that costs you an audience.
- You approve every line before anything sends, in writing, with change control — including what happens on the branches nobody likes to think about.
- A complaint escalation pauses the system and notifies you, and a breach of that voids the contract. A money-back guarantee is worth less: you cannot refund a reputation.
The full touch-by-touch picture — how many messages, from which number, and what a stop request does across every channel — lives on the sequence.
How do you make AI outbound less spammy sounding?
Not with tone. The thing that makes a message feel like spam is that it is a broadcast wearing a first name — the same sentence sent to everyone, going one way, asking for nothing and expecting no reply. Rewriting a one-way blast reminder in a warmer voice produces a warmer one-way blast reminder.
What changes the character of the exchange is asking the registrant something only they can answer and then using the answer. That is a micro-commitment: they state, in their own words, why they signed up and when they plan to join, and the later call references what they actually said. The mechanism is covered in full on how to increase webinar attendance.
And the caveat that cuts both ways
What does the public record actually say about disclosed AI calls?
Almost nothing, and that is the finding rather than a gap in our homework. We went looking three separate times, in the places where people post about the unwanted calls they get, the scams they spot and the AI they resent.
Two things we had to throw away along the way are worth admitting. One anecdote that looked like proof turned out to have been posted by someone who sells the product, so we deleted the inference rather than keep it. And the one cluster of hostility we did find was people reacting to the idea of an AI calling on someone's behalf, inside a vendor's promotional thread — opinion about a concept, not a report of a call anyone received.
So we will never write that recipients do not mind. It was never established, more searching will not establish it, and the only thing that settles it is a run of real disclosed calls with reply sentiment and complaints tracked. That is one of the reasons the pilot exists, and it is why the recordings on this page will be worth more than any benchmark we could quote at you.
Before you commit
Split your registrant list down the middle.
One webinar cycle. Half your registrants get our texts and calls, half get exactly what you run today. Same ads, same week, same offer — and the recordings from your own list are yours to listen to.
- You approve every line before it sends
- Month to month, no term
- A complaint pauses the system
- Calls are recorded
The recordings that end up on this page will come from work like this, once each one clears consent.
Frequently asked questions
None. Not one file in our archive has cleared consent-to-publish review, so nothing is published here. We would rather show you an empty page than a synthesised demo call presented as a real one.
Because a staged call presented as a real one is the exact thing this page exists to refute. A recording is only proof if it is a recording of something that actually happened, with the other party's consent to publish it and any third-party personal information removed.
Yes, and it is enforced in code rather than by good intentions. The component that renders this section refuses to render a set of clips that contains none labelled as having gone badly, and a cap that would hide the bad call is treated as a build error rather than a styling accident.
Yes. It identifies itself as an assistant, then asks why they signed up and listens to the answer. The exact wording is published word for word on the What It Says page rather than paraphrased in marketing copy, because that sentence carries legal weight.
We do not know, and neither does anybody else. Three rounds of research across nine subreddits where people post about unwanted calls, scams and AI found no one describing a disclosed AI call they had actually received. Anyone telling you recipients are fine with it is telling you something nobody has measured.
We have no clients yet, so the honest answer is that nothing has happened yet, and that is a fact about how new this is rather than a claim about quality. If a vendor ever tells you nothing has ever gone wrong, they have either never run volume or they are not listening to their own calls.
Yes. Calls are recorded, which is what makes a written definition of an attended call adjudicable instead of arguable, and your own recordings are yours to listen to. Publishing any of them on this page is a separate decision that needs the other party's consent.
If you are weighing this up, the two pages that answer the rest of the brand-risk question are what it says — the exact opening line, the guardrails, and what happens on a question it cannot answer — and how pricing works. When you want to hear it rather than read about it, book a call and ask us to play you the worst one we have.
Founder & Operator, CallHush
Founder and operator of CallHush. The offer is one sentence: you run a webinar, and we increase your show-up rate and your post-webinar sales with an AI voice and SMS system. CallHush has no closed clients yet — the first engagement is a pilot run as a split of the client’s own registrant list, and nothing on this site is presented as a client result.
View all articles