Both of these statements are true: Across the whole US economy, there’s not really a visible effect of AI on hiring and job mix; Some sectors are absolutely devastated directly by AI. But als…
Quoting Fortune, referring to a report from Oxford Economics:
The primary motivation for this rebranding of job cuts appears to be investor relations. The report notes that attributing staff reductions to AI adoption “conveys a more positive message to investors” than admitting to traditional business failures, such as weak consumer demand or “excessive hiring in the past.” By framing layoffs as a technological pivot, companies can present themselves as forward-thinking innovators rather than businesses struggling with cyclical downturns.
… When asked about the supposed link between AI and layoffs, [Wharton management professor Peter] Cappelli urged people to look closely at announcements. “The headline is, ‘It’s because of AI,’ but if you read what they actually say, they say, ‘We expect that AI will cover this work.’ Hadn’t done it. They’re just hoping. And they’re saying it because that’s what they think investors want to hear.”
Quoting Fortune, referring to a report from Oxford Economics: