I recently saw a post about how good AI has become and that we’re in the middle of a “great reset”
Within a few years, people will swing back to the old ways because they won’t trust anything any more, making AI redundant.
Right now the internet is full of things that look real, sound real, feel real… and still might not be. And at the same time, genuinely real things can be dismissed with one sentence:
“That’s AI.”
So we end up in this strange place where:
- fake can pass as real, and
- real can be waved away as fake.
I don’t know if I agree with the prediction in that exact form, but I do think it’s pointing at something:
We’re moving into an era where trust becomes the differentiator, and where being able to show who made something, how it was made, and what standards sit behind it will matter more than ever.
And from a leadership perspective, that matters because trust isn’t just a marketing issue. It’s a culture issue. A decision-making issue. A reputational issue. And a psychological safety issue.
Before I go any further: here’s how I wrote this piece
I’m talking about trust, so I want to practise it.
This post was co-created with AI, in a very specific way:
- I used it like a dictaphone to capture my raw thoughts (unstructured, and collected over more than one sitting).
- I asked it to pull research and theories so I could read into them and ground my opinion.
- I used it to organise my thinking so this wasn’t just a stream of consciousness spiral about the internet.
- Then I did the final part: I rewrote, refined, chose the stories and owned the opinion.
So the tools were used backstage with human judgement front stage.
And that distinction matters, because leadership in the AI era will increasingly come down to one question:
Is a human being accountable for this?
Two stories that shaped my opinion
1) How I use AI with clients
I do work where AI supports people before they work with me.
It helps them in the early stages:
- collecting their ideas
- finding the thread
- making sense of what they’re trying to say
- getting to clarity faster
Then they come to me, we co-create properly, and they write their talks (or their content, or their message) based on that.
But the main trust differentiator here is:
AI isn’t writing the talk.
The words have to come from you.
The ideas have to come from you.
It has to be in your voice.
It has to be grounded in your own cognitive work and your actual thinking, meaning-making, and experience.
Yes, I know you can train AI to mimic voice, and yes, you can generate something that sounds like you. But to me there’s a level of authenticity that comes from using your own mind not just producing output.
And I recently second-guessed even the early-stage support and thought: is that a step too far? But in the hybrid approach I’m testing and using right now, I don’t believe it is.
Because it’s not replacing you or standing in for you, it’s supporting you to find what’s already there.
2) The podcast “100% human” message
On holiday, I was listening to a podcast. And at the beginning there was a strapline along the lines of:
“This is 100% human.”
No AI in the writing or in the production. And I felt a credible stamp land on that podcast immediately.
And I’m not here as an anti-AI advocate. No way. (I’m literally co-creating this piece with it.)
But when the world gets noisy and confusing, humans crave clarity and accountability.
That one message told me there are humans behind this. Humans who can be questioned and who are responsible for what they’re putting into the world.
Leaders should pay attention to that response. Because the more uncertain the environment becomes, the more people look for:
- clear commitments
- visible standards
- human accountability
What’s happening to trust online (and why leaders should care)
There are three psychological forces colliding:
1) We can be fooled
Most people can’t reliably spot what’s AI-generated, edited, manipulated, or ripped from context now, especially if it’s well done.
And many people think they can.
So we get two reactions at once:
- some people believe convincing nonsense
- others become cynical and start doubting everything
Both create an atmosphere where trust becomes harder to earn, and easier to lose.
2) The liar’s dividend
Once deepfakes exist, anyone can deny real evidence by claiming it’s fake.
A genuine clip, screenshot, or recording can be dismissed with:
- “That’s AI.”
- “That’s edited.”
- “That’s not real.”
And because it’s plausible, it can work. So the existence of fakes creates a new escape route from accountability.
In leadership terms, this matters because it changes the nature of conflict, crisis, reputation, and truth. It means “proof” becomes contestable and organisations need stronger standards for verification and response.
3) The transparency dilemma
Sometimes “AI helped make this” gets heard as:
- less effort
- less judgement
- less authenticity
So even honest disclosure can backfire if it’s framed badly.
Which brings us back to the question people are really asking:
Is a human being accountable for this?
The “reset” I actually believe is coming
I don’t think AI will become redundant.
I think what becomes redundant is content that feels unowned, content that is faceless, contextless, effortless, and unaccountable.
The reset is that trust becomes the differentiator.
And for leaders, that means we need to treat trust as a strategic capability.
The Trust Moves: 7 ways to build credibility in a low trust era
These apply to personal brands and to organisations. If anything, leaders need them more.
1) Draw your line in the sand
People trust clarity. If people don’t know where you stand, they fill in the gaps themselves.
So define (and communicate) what you will and won’t do with AI and content creation.
Examples you can literally copy:
- “AI helps us brainstorm and edit. It doesn’t replace judgement or sign-off.”
- “We don’t use AI to fabricate stories, testimonials, or results.”
- “If something is AI-generated (image/video), we label it.”
- “If we make a factual claim, we can show where it came from.”
2) Use the feed for discovery, not proof
The social feed is fast, emotional, and context-light. People scroll quickly, misread quickly, react quickly, and posts get stripped of nuance.
So don’t try to do all your trust building inside one post.
Instead:
- use social channels to help people find you
- then move “deep trust” to a home base where context lives (newsletter, podcast, website, policy pages, FAQs, long-form)
The feed is the shop window. Your home base is where credibility lives.
3) Add proof pockets
You don’t need to overshare. You just need occasional anchors that say: “A real person is here, doing real thinking.”
Proof pockets might be:
- a behind-the-scenes clip of decision-making or process
- a “how we reached this conclusion” stance
- a screenshot of sources (when making factual claims)
- a “here’s what we changed our mind about” moment
- a human voice note / leader video when it matters
These reduce the “this could be from anywhere” feeling that feeds mistrust.
4) Use process transparency, not tool transparency
Sometimes loudly announcing every tool you used can backfire, because people can interpret it as “outsourced judgement”.
What most people really want to know is:
- Who is accountable for this?
- Was it checked?
- What standards sit behind it?
So instead of leading with “we used AI”, lead with:
- “This was reviewed and signed off by X.”
- “Here’s how we verified it.”
- “Here are the sources.”
- “Here’s what we’ll do if it’s wrong.”
You’re being transparent and protecting the legitimacy signal.
5) Don’t outsource your voice
If you’re building trust as a leader, your voice matters more than ever.
If your content could be posted by anyone, it won’t build trust, even if it’s polished.
Keep the human fingerprints:
- your real beliefs (not generic statements)
- your values and trade-offs
- your stories and experiences
- what you will and won’t do
- what you don’t agree with
6) Have an impersonation plan before you need one
In a world where fakes exist, people can pretend to be you, or claim your real content is fake.
Either way, having a calm plan protects your people and your reputation:
- pin a post listing official accounts
- keep originals of key content (raw files, drafts, timestamps)
- have a short statement ready: “This isn’t us. Our official channels are…”
- know reporting/escalation steps on your main platforms
7) Use AI hard backstage and keep humans front stage
This is the hybrid approach that protects both speed and trust.
AI backstage:
- brainstorming
- outlining
- editing
- repurposing long-form into short-form
- summarising notes
- idea generation and structure
Human front stage:
- lived experience
- judgement
- values
- the final stance
- accountability
- voice
AI can help you think, but it can’t carry responsibility.
Where I’m at with this
I don’t think the question is “Is AI good or bad?” or even whether we’re heading towards a “great reset”.
I think the question is:
Can people feel that a real person is behind this, someone who will stand by it, correct it, and take responsibility for it?
Because trust is increasing in value and urgency.
It’ll be the differentiator.
An invitation
If this sparked something for you, I’d genuinely love to know:
Where’s your line with AI?
What feels like “support” and what feels like “replacement”?
And if you’ve felt trust decrease online recently, you’re not alone. I think we’re all learning, in real time, what it looks like to stay human in a world that can generate anything.
I’d love to know what you’re noticing.
Helen
Recent Comments