What’s driving the AI backlash?

Summary of What’s driving the AI backlash?

by ABC Australia

16m•June 7, 2026
Listen to Episode

Overview of What’s driving the AI backlash?

This ABC News Daily episode explores why public sentiment toward artificial intelligence is turning more negative, even as AI becomes increasingly embedded in everyday life. National AI reporter Cam Wilson explains that the backlash is being driven by a mix of concerns: job losses, low trust in tech companies, AI-generated misinformation, intellectual property theft, and the huge energy and water demands of AI infrastructure. The discussion also looks at how governments in Australia and the US are responding, and whether regulation can restore public confidence.

What’s fueling the backlash?

Public pushback is becoming more visible

The episode opens with high-profile examples of AI skepticism and resistance:

  • Comedian Ronnie Cheng told Harvard graduates to “f*** AI” and argued that people should resist, not embrace, it.
  • Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt was booed while urging students to accept AI’s spread.
  • Protests are growing in the US and Australia against data centres and the broader expansion of AI infrastructure.

The overall message: the cultural mood is shifting from excitement to suspicion.

Core reasons people are worried

The main concerns raised include:

  • Job displacement: AI is increasingly linked to workforce reductions.
  • Data and privacy concerns: People worry about how companies use their information.
  • Misinformation and low-quality content: AI-generated “slop” is flooding social feeds.
  • Creative rights: Artists and media creators argue that AI companies trained models on their work without fair compensation.
  • Environmental costs: AI systems require large amounts of electricity, water, and physical infrastructure.

AI and the job market

The fear is real, but the evidence is mixed

The transcript distinguishes between:

  • Headline-driven layoffs, where companies say AI is part of why they are cutting roles.
  • Broader economic evidence, which so far does not show mass AI-driven unemployment in Australia.

Examples mentioned include:

  • Telstra cutting over 600 jobs while accelerating AI rollout
  • Commonwealth Bank announcing both an AI training program and 300 job cuts
  • Layoffs or restructuring at companies like WiseTech, Atlassian, and others

Cam Wilson’s key point is that the “AI is already replacing everyone” narrative is stronger than the current hard data. What seems more likely right now is:

  • slower hiring in some AI-exposed sectors
  • roles being absorbed rather than fully eliminated
  • companies using AI as a justification for restructuring

Australia’s unusually low trust in AI

Australians are skeptical, even while using AI a lot

A striking tension highlighted in the episode is that Australians are:

  • among the highest users of AI tools
  • but also among the most distrustful of AI’s impact

Polling cited in the episode suggests:

  • Australians have some of the lowest trust levels globally
  • more than a majority believe the risks outweigh the benefits

This distrust is aimed less at the technology itself and more at the companies behind it, especially around data use, profit concentration, and power.

Government and policy response

Australia wants to avoid a US-style backlash

The episode notes that Australian officials are increasingly aware of the political and social risks of unchecked AI rollout.

Key developments:

  • Assistant Minister Andrew Charlton warned against a US-style AI backlash.
  • The government launched an AI Safety Institute to monitor risks and advise on regulation.
  • The stated goal is to make sure AI benefits are spread broadly, not captured only by major tech companies.

The government’s message is that AI adoption needs a social license: public trust is necessary if AI is going to be accepted.

The US is also tightening oversight

The transcript notes a change in tone from the Trump administration:

  • Trump initially framed AI as a race for business and national security, especially against China.
  • He later signed an executive order requiring tech companies to share AI models for 30 days before release.

That shift suggests even strong AI boosters are acknowledging potential dangers.

Bigger picture: power, wealth, and regulation

The backlash is also about concentration of power

Beyond technical risks, the episode emphasizes a deeper political concern:

  • AI is being built and controlled by a small number of extremely wealthy, powerful companies.
  • Those companies are also benefiting from public resources through energy use, data access, and infrastructure demand.

This makes the backlash partly a reaction against who controls AI, not just what AI does.

Australia may have leverage

Cam Wilson argues that Australia is in a stronger position than many countries to shape the rules because:

  • Australians generally support government intervention more than some other publics
  • Australia has a track record of regulating tech more aggressively than peers
  • major AI firms want to invest here, which gives Australia bargaining power

The key question is whether Australia can use that leverage to demand:

  • safety standards
  • fair treatment of workers and creators
  • stronger accountability from AI firms

Main takeaways

  • The AI backlash is growing because people see AI as a threat to jobs, privacy, creativity, and the environment.
  • Public distrust is high in Australia, even though AI usage is widespread.
  • Clear evidence of mass AI-driven job losses is still limited, but companies are already using AI to justify cuts and slower hiring.
  • Governments are starting to respond with regulation and safety frameworks.
  • The debate is no longer just about innovation — it is also about power, trust, and whether the public gets a fair share of AI’s benefits.