Artificial intelligence has made it easier than ever for brands to produce polished content—but that efficiency may be creating a new challenge: consumers increasingly assume that what they see was generated by AI.
New research from Calgary-based consumer research platform Cashew found that 87% of consumers believe brands use at least some AI-generated content, even though only 13% are very confident they can identify it. The survey, which gathered responses from over 2,000 consumers across Canada and the United States, points to a widening trust gap between brands and their audiences.
That skepticism is particularly strong in areas where credibility carries greater consequences, including health, finance, customer testimonials, and behind-the-scenes content. Rather than relying on polished messaging or broad claims of authenticity, consumers are looking for tangible proof: product quality was the leading way respondents said brands could stand out, cited by 38%, followed by real customer stories at 31%.
For marketers, the findings suggest that the central question is no longer simply whether content appears authentic. It is whether audiences have enough evidence to believe it. As AI-generated material becomes harder to distinguish from human-created work, credible customer experiences, transparent communication, and original insight may become some of a brand’s most valuable assets.
Calgary.tech spoke with Cashew CEO and Co-Founder Addy Graves about what prompted the research, where brands should draw the line when using AI, and why Calgary remains a promising—if still developing—place to build a globally competitive technology company.
What prompted Cashew to study how consumers perceive AI-generated brand content, and why is this question especially important now?
AG: The idea actually came out of a conversation at the CMO Alliance Summit in Austin last month. We asked a room of about 60 CMOs what was keeping them up at night, and three themes came up over and over again: authenticity, differentiation, and credibility in a world where AI is making it easier than ever to create content.
That raised an obvious question for us: we knew what marketers were worried about, but what did consumers actually think? Were they noticing AI-generated brand content? Did it affect how they viewed brands? We decided to find out.
What we discovered is that the conversation has evolved. It’s no longer just about whether a brand feels authentic, it’s about whether consumers trust what they’re seeing. And that’s a much higher bar for brands to meet.
Your research found that 87% of consumers believe brands use some AI-generated content, while only 13% are very confident they can identify it. What does that gap tell us about the current state of consumer trust?
AG: That’s probably the most alarming finding. Consumers are already approaching brand content with a healthy amount of skepticism. Even if they can’t confidently identify AI-generated content, they assume it’s there. That means brands can’t rely on simply saying they’re authentic, transparent or customer-focused anymore. Those have become table stakes. Consumers are looking for proof through real customer experiences, credible evidence and signals that what they’re seeing reflects reality rather than polished marketing.
Which finding from the survey surprised you most, and did the responses differ meaningfully between Canadian and American consumers?
AG: What surprised me most was how little confidence (13% who say they are very confident) consumers have in spotting AI-generated content while at the same time assuming brands are already using it. That’s a baseline level of skepticism that is hard for brands to overcome.
Although the overall percent of people who said they were very confident when they could detect AI being used, Americans were significantly more likely to say they were “very confident” compared to Canadians.
Consumers expressed particular concern about AI use in health, finance, testimonials, and behind-the-scenes content. What makes these areas especially sensitive?
AG: These are high-stakes categories where the consequences of misinformation are much greater. If you’re making decisions about your health or finances, or you’re evaluating whether real customers actually had a positive experience, people want confidence that what they’re seeing is genuine. The closer content gets to influencing important decisions, the higher consumers’ expectations for authenticity become.
Real customer stories ranked among the strongest ways for brands to stand out. How can companies demonstrate that these stories are genuine rather than simply producing another polished piece of marketing?
AG: The key is showing proof instead of perfection. Consumers don’t necessarily want heavily produced testimonials. They want stories that feel real and verifiable. That could mean featuring identifiable customers, sharing specific details, incorporating UGC, or highlighting experiences that are not overly scripted. Ironically, a little imperfection often makes something more believable.
Where should brands draw the line between using AI as a useful creative tool and allowing it to undermine authenticity? Should they disclose when and how AI was used?
AG: AI is an incredible productivity tool and I don’t think consumers expect brands to avoid it altogether. The issue is not AI itself. It is using AI to create the illusion of human experiences that never happened. There is a big difference between using AI to help draft copy or analyze data, and using it to fabricate testimonials or present synthetic experiences as real.
How do these findings connect to the problem Cashew is working to solve, and how will the research influence your company’s product or strategy?
AG: This research reinforces the reason Cashew exists. As AI makes it easier to produce content, original human insight becomes even more valuable. Our platform helps companies generate proprietary consumer research so they can build content around real customer perspectives instead of generic marketing messages. We think the future competitive advantage is not producing more content. It is having something original and credible to say.
What has Calgary offered Cashew as a place to build the company, and what would help more Calgary technology startups develop and compete globally?
AG: Calgary has been an incredibly supportive ecosystem for Cashew – from the many accelerator programs we’ve been a part of (movement 51, Creative Destruction Lab, Plug and Play) to the majority of our pre-seed investors being Calgary-based, we’re so grateful to be building Cashew from Calgary.
I’d love to see a greater and more diverse tech community grow in Calgary – from investors to founders themselves. I think as Canadians, it’s more difficult for us to raise funding because investors aren’t as open to risk so we need to do more with less. In the end, it makes us all more resilient and teaches us to build without unlimited resources. However, attracting more investors who have greater openness to early stage companies who have yet to find true product market fit (similar to the way Metiquity invests) would help more Canadian and Calgary-based startups have a chance at becoming large and scalable companies.
Leave a Reply