The year the CEO trusted comms, and the year that trust gets tested.

Only 2% of Fortune 1000 comms leaders report falling chief executive confidence. The next test of that trust is the AI claim made in a leader's name.

Michael Reaney  ·  17 August 2026  ·  5 min read

Communications leaders have rarely been more trusted by their chief executives. The Weber Advisory and Gravity Research Confidence Gap study, published 8th April from a survey of more than 200 Fortune 1000 communications and corporate-affairs leaders, recorded its strongest year yet: only 2% of respondents report falling confidence from their chief executive, down from 13% a year earlier.

However, the same research points to where that trust is likely to be tested next. According to Gravity Research's president, the pressure will come from the AI claims made under a leader's name rather than from the team's own capability.

Two further findings this year suggest why. Teneo's Persuasion with Precision, a poll of 2,004 UK adults, 102 MPs and 502 technology professionals, found that 64% of the technology professionals believe the public would be more worried about AI if it understood it fully, while 66% consider the public debate poorly informed. An executive making a confident AI claim is therefore speaking to an audience that already suspects the risks are being understated. Muck Rack's State of AI in PR 2026, drawn from 564 professionals, found that 51% now work under a formal AI use policy, up from 21% two years ago, yet tool adoption has run well ahead of the governance beneath it.

Taken together, these findings describe a specific exposure. The tools are widely deployed, the public is sceptical, and the leader's name is on the output. A single AI-assisted claim that proves wrong, or that reads as spin, lands on the executive rather than on the tool.

The practical answer is visible human accountability for whatever goes out under a leader's name: claims that can be proven, a named person who stands behind the text, and executives fluent enough to be precise about AI in public rather than merely confident.

Three questions for whoever owns executive communications:

1. When a statement goes out under the chief executive's name, can the team name the person who stands behind each claim in it?
2. If a journalist asked how a leadership statement was produced, would the answer build trust or cost it?
3. Is the executive fluent enough on AI to be precise in public, or only confident?

Worth reading

• The Digital Omnibus on AI (Regulation (EU) 2026/1744), in force from 27th July: pushed back the deadline for standalone high-risk AI systems, HR tools, credit-scoring and the like, from 2nd August 2026 to 2nd December 2027. The labelling duty is unaffected: AI-generated public-interest text must still be labelled, unless a named human reviewed it, from 2nd August as originally planned. Teams that read an "AI Act delayed" headline and paused their labelling work are working to the wrong deadline. Council of the EU, press release, 29th June 2026
• V2 Communications, CEO Visibility Report (June; 250 marketing and communications professionals across the US, UK, Australia and Canada, run with Researchscape): executive visibility is now treated as a business requirement rather than a brand exercise. Asked for the main benefit of a visible chief executive, 64% named customer and market trust, ahead of investor confidence at 47% and thought leadership at 46%. GlobeNewswire, 9th June 2026
• Golin, CEO Impact Index (same period): the counterweight. Chief executives who pulled back on public engagement lost close to 3 trillion earned impressions year on year, yet 68% of chief executives had a social or policy issue shape how they were perceived, and leaders seen as reactive watched negative sentiment more than double. Exposure without a steady voice can cost more than it earns. Ragan, By the Numbers: Golin CEO Index 2026
• Ragan, 2026 Communications Benchmark Report (more than 800 communicators worldwide): planned AI budget jumped, with 24% intending to put 10 to 19% of budget into AI this year against 9% who did in 2025, while 88% say they are not fully prepared to lead an AI transformation in their own function. The spending is arriving ahead of the readiness. Ragan, 2026 Communications Benchmark Report

The moves

• Sotheby's named Natasha Le Bel chief communications officer on 5th August, moving over from the same role at rival auction house Christie's, where she led global communications for two decades across the art, culture and luxury sector.
• The Executive Leadership Council appointed Crystal L. Brown chief engagement, communications and marketing officer on 23rd June, folding all three functions under one seat.
• Ipsos named Marion Beyret chief communications officer (announced June), moving from leading communications and public affairs for Stellantis in Europe to the top communications seat at the global research group.
• Assurant appointed Kelli Ertel chief communications officer and chief of staff on 23rd July, folding global brand strategy and events into the communications remit and adding a seat on the management committee.