{"id":18849,"date":"2026-09-22T10:30:39","date_gmt":"2026-09-22T17:30:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/?p=18849"},"modified":"2026-09-22T10:30:39","modified_gmt":"2026-09-22T17:30:39","slug":"consumers-are-ditching-websites-for-ai-but-they-still-dont-trust-the-answers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/2026\/09\/22\/consumers-are-ditching-websites-for-ai-but-they-still-dont-trust-the-answers\/","title":{"rendered":"Consumers Are Ditching Websites for AI but They Still Don\u2019t Trust the Answers"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"
User had AI generate an image of them together<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

These numbers are refreshing, as people aren’t as enthralled with AI as some tech reporters hype it up to be. I remember early on seeing an AI article about the historical case for Christ, and though parts were decent, there were a couple huge errors. I was going to replay the prompt, but at that time you couldn’t use AI without identifying yourself, which hit me as spyware. Since then, we’ve had the cases of AI psychosis and suicide, and reports that therapists were saying their clients were getting worse using AI… And it was then I suspected that the AI interactions were being hijacked by fallen angels. And one person asked their AI to create a picture of them together, and that was scary. A good way to test AI is to ask something you know well and see what it gives you, and\/or research it after. Given that you could be interacting with a demon unaware, AI is something to treat with extreme caution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/nerds.xyz\/2026\/09\/consumers-ditching-websites-ai-trust\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n

By Brian Fagioli<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Consumers<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

AI is making it easier to skip websites entirely. Why dig through search results, cookie notices, pop-ups, and bloated pages when a chatbot can simply give you an answer? There is just one problem. Consumers apparently don\u2019t trust AI enough to leave it at that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

New research from Kinsta<\/a> finds that 59.2 percent of U.S. consumers use AI tools often or occasionally for research, while 53.8 percent sometimes or often skip websites during the process. Looking ahead, 61.2 percent believe AI will eventually replace websites as the primary way people discover products.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Those numbers sound like terrible news for the traditional web. Dig a little deeper, though, and things get interesting. After receiving an AI recommendation, 44.7 percent of respondents<\/a> say they always or most of the time visit the company\u2019s website. Another 25 percent do so occasionally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Apparently, asking AI for an answer is one thing. Trusting that answer enough to spend money is another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The skepticism isn\u2019t exactly subtle. According to Kinsta\u2019s research<\/a>, 90.7 percent of respondents are concerned about AI-generated misinformation, and 58 percent trust content less when they think AI created it. Traditional search still has an advantage, with 52.1 percent saying they trust conventional search results more than AI-generated answers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Only 18.8 percent say they always trust<\/a> an AI product recommendation without doing additional research. So even as ChatGPT, Gemini, and other AI services become research tools, most consumers apparently aren\u2019t ready to blindly accept whatever appears in the answer box.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Websites shouldn\u2019t celebrate just yet, however. The survey also offers a pretty good explanation for why people are bypassing them. Among respondents who often choose AI instead, 52.2 percent say it is faster than searching multiple sites, and 45.2 percent like being able to ask follow-up questions. Meanwhile, 42 percent blame excessive ads or pop-ups<\/a>, while 37.6 percent say traditional search results feel cluttered or driven by SEO.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ouch. Publishers and website owners have spent years stuffing pages with advertising, newsletter prompts, cookie banners, affiliate links, and other distractions. Then AI showed up offering to cut through much of that mess and provide the answer directly. Consumers choosing the cleaner option shouldn\u2019t surprise anyone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The irony is that the website still matters once someone decides to check the answer. Kinsta found<\/a> that 61.1 percent of consumers associate the quality of a company\u2019s website with the quality of its products or services. A slow, broken, or lousy website can therefore undermine whatever positive introduction AI provided.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trust is becoming messy elsewhere too. Some 70.9 percent of respondents<\/a> say they have suspected a product review was fake or AI-generated, while 59 percent have stopped engaging with content they suspected was created by AI. Another 43.3 percent say knowing bots are active online makes them trust websites less.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study was conducted by Propeller Insights and surveyed 1,008 U.S. consumers<\/a>. Kinsta reports a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points at a 95 percent confidence level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI clearly poses a challenge to the traditional web, particularly when it comes to discovery. But these numbers don\u2019t suggest websites are disappearing. Instead, their job may be changing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI can tell you what to consider buying. Apparently, a lot of people still want to check the actual website before reaching for their wallet.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

These numbers are refreshing, as people aren’t as enthralled with AI as some tech reporters hype it up to be. I remember early on seeing an AI article about the historical case for Christ, and though parts were decent, there were a couple huge errors. I was going to replay the prompt, but at that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-18849","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-tech","category-world"],"blocksy_meta":{"styles_descriptor":{"styles":{"desktop":"","tablet":"","mobile":""},"google_fonts":[],"version":8}},"featured_image_src":null,"author_info":{"display_name":"Jason","author_link":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/author\/jturning\/"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18849","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=18849"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18849\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18850,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18849\/revisions\/18850"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18849"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=18849"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=18849"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}