Summary of Key Points
Negative sentiment towards AI among the American public is on the rise: More than 30% of people believe that AI will have a negative impact on the United States in the next decade, 70% are concerned about AI taking away jobs, and 60% oppose the construction of data centers near their homes. This sentiment is directly affecting collaborations between AI companies and influencers. Creators who accept AI-related work are criticized for “standing up for AI,” and even using AI tools in their work can lead to resistance. To mitigate these risks, intermediaries are now charging a “public opinion premium” (an additional 20%-30% on the regular fee). Behind this is the general public's sense of loss of control over AI: they cannot stop large companies from building data centers or laying off employees, but they can vent their anger by criticizing influencers. Meanwhile, AI companies, trying to gain trust through influencers, have inadvertently made them the scapegoats.
How Deep Is the Antipathy Towards AI in the United States? Data Speaks Volumes
The negative view of AI among Americans has shifted from mere concern to outright opposition:
- Perception of AI’s Impact: 39% believe AI will have a negative effect on the U.S. in the next decade, compared to only 18% who hold a positive view (according to a Penn State University survey);
- Dissatisfaction with Regulation: 68% think the government is not regulating AI enough;
- Resistance to Data Centers: The percentage of people opposing the construction of data centers near their homes has increased from 49% to 61% in just four months;
- Fear of Job Loss: 71% believe AI will reduce job opportunities in the U.S. (Pew Research survey).
The core message of these data is that ordinary people are not concerned about whether AI is an economic pillar; they are worried about losing their jobs, having their local resources (such as electricity and water) used by data centers, and the risks associated with AI.
Does Accepting AI Work Equal Getting in Trouble? Influencers Become the Scapegoats?
In China, influencers who take on AI-related work are often seen as taking advantage of the situation, but in the U.S., it has turned into a moral judgment:
- OpenAI’s Branding Blunder: OpenAI invited 30 influencers to stay in a luxury resort to experience ChatGPT, and while they posted videos of bathtubs and deer, two critical videos received over 500,000 views. Netizens criticized, saying, “The $2,000 per night room fee must be a form of sponsorship, and the green space looks suitable for a data center!” Influencer McCarrick responded by asking, “Everyone uses Amazon on their phones—why only me?” but was then questioned about his lack of understanding of the AI controversies before promoting it.
- Criticism for Using AI Tools: Science popularizer Hank Green was criticized for using ChatGPT to organize his content, leading him to apologize and establish rules for using AI. Designer Cliff Tan, while promoting ByteDance’s Dreamina, emphasized the need to think independently, but was still criticized and said, “I didn’t earn much from it.”
In short, any association with AI, whether monetary or not, can make an influencer the target of criticism for “standing with AI.”
AI Companies Are Only Making Things Worse: More Promotion, More Trouble
AI companies’ actions are exacerbating public backlash:
- Data Center Conflicts: The Texas governor’s plans for an “AI center” were halted due to the high energy and water consumption of data centers;
- Employment Anxiety: Large model companies claim AI improves efficiency, but tech firms lay off employees while investing in AI, making people feel that AI companies are profiting at their expense;
- Continuous Marketing Failures: Of the 15 AI-related ads during the 2026 Super Bowl, nearly half received negative reviews. Ring’s AI pet-advertising campaign was criticized for seeming like community surveillance; Anthropic’s World Cup ad, which discussed AI risks without providing solutions, was mocked by Sam Altman; Suno’s ad, using a fake story about a kindergarten parents’ conflict, further alienated the public.
The more AI companies try to make AI seem normal, the more they highlight public concerns about job loss, privacy, and fake content.
Why Are Influencers the Target of Public Anger? The Helpless Position of Ordinary People
The Guardian pointed out the underlying issue: People’s anger towards AI stems from a sense of loss of control—they can decide whether to use ChatGPT, but not what AI models companies use or where data centers are built, nor can they prevent companies from making decisions that affect them. Since they cannot stop large companies, they vent their anger in comment sections. Influencers, being the “spokespersons” for AI, are easily targeted and rely on fan feedback, making them the first to be attacked. Social media platforms also amplify this anger, with users often overestimating the intensity of others’ reactions, leading to more intense criticism.
Why Are AI Projects More Expensive? The Rise of “Public Opinion Premiums”
AI companies need the trust of influencers (given the current negative perception of large companies), and influencers need money. However, taking on AI work comes with criticism, so intermediaries are charging a premium to compensate for the risks. Top AI companies’ project budgets range from five to seven figures in dollars, with intermediaries adding a 20%-30% surcharge. But can this business model sustain itself? Such price increases can only cover initial losses; if public opposition to AI persists, influencers may be less willing to take on these projects, and companies will need to change their approach, such as reducing flashy PR and addressing real public concerns (job loss, resource usage, privacy). In essence, the “public opinion premium” reflects the conflict between AI companies and the public, with influencers caught in the middle.
In Conclusion: The issue with AI in the U.S. is not about the technology itself, but about the perception that “I’m not benefiting from AI, yet I’m bearing all the risks.” Unless this sentiment is addressed, the high cost of AI-related work will remain a problem.