The Informed General Public Is Conflicted on AI, But Corporate Communications Can’t Be
Blog Post05 Feb, 2026
While RepTrak data has shown increasing polarization in general sentiment toward AI, new data from our latest global polling shows that AI also ranks at or near the bottom when it comes to trust and desirability as a communications channel.
AI tools rank fifth out of eight channels for trusted communications (28%) but tied for last for desirability (17%)—the widest gap between credibility and preference of any communications channel.
While this is the first time we've been able to plot AI as a communications channel, we don't believe this is a data quirk. It reveals something fundamental: as opinions on AI harden—both positive and negative—those divided views are shaping how people receive AI-mediated company information.
Uncertainty about AI declined significantly in 2025, with agreement that "AI has a negative impact on society" rising 3 percentage points even as "AI makes life easier" jumped 5 points. Fewer people are on the fence, and those forming opinions bring that context to every AI-generated answer they encounter.
Understanding this tension—between what stakeholders think about AI and how much they trust it as an information channel—is critical for communications leaders navigating 2026.
The Channel Hierarchy Still Holds
Even while AI has a massive share of voice in communications circles, and even as more than 2+ billion people see Google AI Overviews every month, our data shows that AI remains an emerging communications channel with all the familiar hurdles.
Traditional patterns dominate what people trust and want for company information. In most cases, a communication channel is roughly as trustworthy as it is desirable (or, if you will, as desirable as it is trustworthy):
AI, on the other hand, shows an 11-point gap—people encounter AI answers, but given a choice, they'd prefer something else. This matters because AI isn't operating in a neutral context. Unlike other channels, it is a stakeholder, a communications channel, and a macro trend impacting both corporate reputations and personal livelihoods.
Reluctant Acceptance: Why Trust and Desire Diverge
The data reveals something counterintuitive: AI's low desirability isn't evidence of distrust. It's evidence of reluctant acceptance.
The distinction matters. People trust AI tools somewhat, but resent their growing inevitability.
Consider the broader sentiment data, which shows simultaneous movement in opposite directions:
Concern is hardening: Agreement that "AI has a negative impact on society" rose from 24.3% (Q3 2023) to 29.3% (Q4 2025)—a 5-point increase
But so is appreciation: Agreement that "AI makes my life easier" jumped from 27.7% (Q3 2024) to 32.3% (Q4 2025)—a 4.6-point gain in just over a year
The key signal: "Not sure" responses plummeted across all measures—from 8.5% to 5.5% on "makes life easier," from 9.3% to 7.0% on "negative impact"
This isn't simple polarization—it's dual awareness. The same population increasingly agrees that AI creates societal concerns and delivers personal benefits. Fence-sitters are choosing sides, but many are choosing both sides depending on the question.
When AI surfaces company information, stakeholders bring this duality: they accept AI as adequate and even useful, while wishing they didn't have to rely on it. The 17% desirability score reflects this reluctance—a psychological tax on a channel people increasingly can't avoid but remain conflicted about using.
The trajectory is clear: as AI tools become more embedded in search and discovery, usage will grow regardless of preference. But desirability isn't the metric that matters—trust is. The question for communications leaders is how to grow trust in AI as a channel even while desirability remains structurally depressed. That likely happens through improved corporate communications holistically: as companies tell AI stories that address personal fears and reinforce tangible benefits, they collectively raise trust in AI-mediated information. Your company's AI narrative doesn't just shape perceptions of you—it contributes to the trust environment for the entire channel.
The Dual Challenge: Channel and Narrative
As AI usage grows through inevitability rather than choice, companies face two interconnected challenges.
First, the channel challenge: What does AI say when people search for your company? AI doesn't publish your content—it synthesizes from your content. It pulls from owned channels, earned media, social platforms, and reports to generate responses. You can't "message through" AI the way you message through traditional channels. You can only influence the source material AI uses.
This is why "AI as a stakeholder" matters strategically (and why RepTrak has made providing our customers with a solution such as priority). AI synthesizes your reputation from everywhere else. What it says reveals whether your owned content, earned media, and overall communications ecosystem are working. AI functions as a mirror, not a megaphone.
Second, the narrative challenge: What's your AI story? With concern and appreciation both rising, stakeholders bring complex expectations to every AI interaction—including AI-mediated company information.
Companies that understand general sentiment toward AI will be in a better position to improve both their own reputations and, more generally, sentiment toward AI, creating dual benefits. In our current environment, this means finding on-message ways to balance the corporate benefits while directly addressing societal concerns through visible commitments to responsible AI governance, oversight, and transparency.
The strongest position pairs channel monitoring with narrative leadership: ensure AI accurately represents you while actively shaping how stakeholders view AI's role in your operations and industry.
