The Global Risk Advisory Council’s October 6, 2026 Reputation Risk Index puts AI misuse ahead of child-safety and privacy breaches, based on more than 150 crisis-experienced public-affairs leaders’ judgments rather than a consumer poll or measured brand losses.
What the new index says, and what it measures
Companies now face misuse of AI as their top reputational threat, according to the Global Risk Advisory Council’s October 6, 2026 Reputation Risk Index, which placed AI misuse at the top of perceived company reputation risks: ahead of harm to children and sensitive-data breaches. The index reflects judgments from more than 150 public-affairs leaders with crisis experience, not consumer views or evidence of measured brand damage (superpowerdaily.com).
Council members tied the AI concern to a range of harms. They cited operational safety failures, data exposure, hacks and fraud, and pressure on privacy protections. They also named workplace disruption and lawsuits alleging real-world harm. The council attached an advisory to the October edition urging immediate action to limit potential long-term brand damage.
Council chair Isabel Casillas Guzman framed the business risk as a loss of standing with customers, investors and other stakeholders and warned that “AI use, or overuse” could quickly damage those relationships.
Why AI use can become a reputation risk
Respondents treated AI-related reputational risk as multi-faceted. They linked deployments to operational safety issues, exposures and fraud, legal risks from lawsuits, and the potential for strained workplace relations: all factors they judged could erode public confidence in a brand.
A separate consumer study in June 2026 offers a different but relevant view. Talker Research surveyed 11,000 internet users worldwide between June 17 and June 25, 2026 on behalf of Ping Identity. It found 56% of respondents say it’s important to know when a brand is using AI, 39% become more cautious about sharing personal information when AI is undisclosed, and two in five would avoid a brand or leave its site immediately in that situation (www.fwbusiness.com).
The Talker Research poll also recorded consumer experience with errors. Forty percent said they had caught AI providing made-up or false information at least once. Only 31% said they would trust AI to independently make decisions for them: figures that help explain why experts worry about errors and misrepresentation even though the index measures expert perceptions rather than verified consumer behaviour.
Darryl Jones, Vice President, Consumer Segment Strategy at Ping Identity, said consumers worry an AI agent could misrepresent personality or values. He also said many users have limited awareness of what “agentic AI” is, underscoring a gap between capability and public comfort.
Taken together, the Reputation Risk Index and the Talker Research poll differ in population, timing and purpose. The index records risk rankings and an advisory from crisis-seasoned public-affairs leaders on October 6, 2026. The June 2026 consumer poll captures stated attitudes and self-reported experiences from online respondents. Expert perception of risk is not the same thing as a universal consumer reaction.
What Canadian brands should take from it
For Canadian brands, the combined findings send a clear signal: expert alarm about potential brand harm from AI, alongside consumer interest in disclosure and accuracy, points to where firms should focus their reviews. The Global Risk Advisory Council explicitly urged immediate action to protect brands, framing the issue as a threat to public confidence.
The June 2026 consumer data give a concrete starting point. A majority want to know when brands use AI, many say they would be more cautious about sharing personal data if AI is undisclosed, and some would leave a site immediately. Those responses point to disclosure policies, clearer error-handling and defined accountability as practical areas for review.
The takeaways for newsrooms and brand managers are pragmatic. Treat the Reputation Risk Index as an expert warning to audit AI use and trust controls. Treat the consumer poll as evidence that disclosure and accuracy matter to many users. Neither source predicts that every AI use will harm every brand.
Watch next for whether companies respond with updated disclosure rules, public AI-use audits, or clearer customer notices, and whether those moves ease expert alarm or change consumer behaviour.
This article was created with AI assistance.
