AI misuse tops companies’ reputational risks, survey finds
publishers 52articles 100first reported 23 Sep, 14:00 UTCdeveloping since 30 Sep · 30 editions
Misuse of artificial intelligence has become the leading reputational threat for companies, according to the latest quarterly Reputation Risk Index from the Global Risk Advisory Council.
The survey of more than 150 public affairs leaders ranked AI misuse above accusations of harming children and violations involving sensitive personal information. Participants included former heads of state, government ministers and senior executives from more than 20 countries across five continents, according to Global Situation Room, the Washington-based firm that created the council and index.
The council said AI had repeatedly ranked as a major concern since the index began in April 2025, but its latest report added an advisory urging businesses to act immediately to limit potential long-term brand damage. Council chair Isabel Casillas Guzman said rapid corporate adoption had coincided with declining public trust, creating risks among customers, investors and other stakeholders.
Respondents credited AI with improving organizational efficiency while also linking its expansion to safety and data concerns, fraud, hacking, privacy pressures, workforce disruption and litigation. Global Situation Room recommended measures including reducing AI-generated content and retaining human customer service.
Concerns about deployment extend to military uses. OpenAI human rights and responsible deployment lead Sarah Yager said at a New York conference that targeting and autonomous weapons were among the applications that worried her most.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 7 with the publisher's own text; 8 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 156 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 52
- Source articles
- 100
- Given to the writer
- 8, 7 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 8
- This version written
- 156 h after the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
WHAT THE EDITOR DID
The second model checked the writer's draft against the same sources and published it as written.
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →