Generative AI isn’t a shiny new experiment anymore—it’s marketing’s default setting.

A new report from Typeform, Get Real: Generative AI and the Marketer, finds that 95% of marketers now use generative AI in their work. Even more telling: 74% say they depend on it or use it regularly. In other words, AI has crossed the line from “nice-to-have” to operational infrastructure.

Based on a survey of 2,256 respondents—1,191 marketers and 1,065 consumers—the report offers a timely snapshot of AI’s normalization inside marketing teams. But the more interesting takeaway may be what it says about trust: consumers care less about whether AI was used and more about whether the content is good.

That nuance could reshape how brands think about transparency, differentiation, and the elusive “human touch.”

AI Is Now Table Stakes

If you work in marketing and aren’t using generative AI, you’re officially in the minority.

Among the 95% adoption rate, the most common use case is copywriting and written content (79%). Visuals and graphics follow at 57%, with video and motion design at 31%. That hierarchy mirrors what we’ve seen across the martech stack: text-first tools are the gateway drug, with visual and video workflows following close behind.

The sentiment? Overwhelmingly optimistic.

Sixty percent of marketers say they feel hopeful about AI’s role in their work, compared to just 13% who describe themselves as skeptical. Even more striking, 71% say they’re just as proud—or prouder—of their output when AI is involved.

That finding runs counter to early fears that AI-assisted work would feel like “cheating” or diminish creative ownership. Instead, AI appears to be reframed as a productivity partner, not a creative shortcut.

This aligns with broader industry trends. Platforms across the ecosystem—from CRM giants to content management systems—are embedding AI natively, not as add-ons. In that context, Typeform’s framing of AI as workflow infrastructure rather than novelty tech feels less like hype and more like inevitability.

The Trust Gap Isn’t What You Think

For the past two years, AI transparency has dominated headlines. Should brands disclose AI-generated content? Will audiences punish them if they don’t?

Typeform’s data suggests the answer is more complicated than either side admits.

While 59% of consumers believe brands should disclose when content is AI-generated, only 21% say AI-generated marketing would actually make them trust a brand less.

That’s a significant gap between principle and behavior.

Consumers may endorse transparency in theory, but in practice, quality and intent carry more weight. If the content resonates, informs, or entertains, the production method becomes secondary.

Meanwhile, marketers are already acting on that calculus. Nearly half say they’ve published AI-generated work without disclosing it—and would do so again.

That’s not necessarily a sign of bad faith. It may reflect a shift in how AI is perceived internally. If AI is simply another tool—like spellcheck, design software, or marketing automation—marketers may not see it as requiring disclosure at all.

Still, the optics matter. The gap between consumer expectations and marketer behavior isn’t insignificant, even if the “trust penalty” appears smaller than many feared. Brands operating in regulated or reputation-sensitive sectors may still tread carefully.

The broader implication: AI disclosure debates may evolve from binary transparency mandates to more context-driven guidelines. In a world saturated with AI-assisted content, the differentiator becomes craftsmanship, not the toolchain.

Human Editing Is the Real Differentiator

If AI is becoming baseline, what sets teams apart?

According to the report, it’s human judgment.

A full 91% of marketers say they occasionally or often edit AI-generated copy to ensure it sounds human. That figure underscores a critical point: while AI accelerates production, it doesn’t eliminate the need for voice, empathy, or brand nuance.

In fact, the more AI handles the mechanical heavy lifting, the more marketers are doubling down on what machines can’t easily replicate—context, cultural awareness, and audience insight.

This dynamic echoes a broader shift in marketing roles. As automation handles execution, strategic oversight and creative direction become more valuable. The marketer of 2026 looks less like a content factory and more like a systems architect—overseeing prompts, refining outputs, and aligning everything to business goals.

Malinda Sandman, Global VP of Marketing at Typeform, frames it as a transition from experimentation to expectation. AI is no longer the edge case; it’s the assumed baseline. The opportunity, she argues, lies in pairing intelligent systems with genuine audience understanding.

That’s a subtle but important repositioning. If AI-generated content becomes ubiquitous, differentiation shifts upstream—to data collection, audience insight, and workflow orchestration. That’s precisely where Typeform wants to play: turning conversational data into actionable marketing automation.

From Forms to Workflows

Typeform has long positioned itself as more than a form builder. The company describes its platform as an AI engagement tool that turns forms into workflows—collecting conversational data and activating it through automation.

The timing of this report isn’t accidental.

As AI-generated content floods the web, first-party data and nuanced audience understanding become competitive advantages. Marketers need more than generic prompts—they need contextual inputs. Platforms that help teams capture high-quality data and feed it into AI-driven workflows stand to benefit.

In that sense, the report doubles as market commentary. AI may be commoditizing content creation, but it’s increasing the strategic value of data infrastructure.

For B2B teams, especially, that shift matters. As buying committees grow more complex and digital touchpoints multiply, the ability to gather structured insights—and translate them into personalized, automated journeys—becomes central to growth.

Methodology at a Glance

The findings are based on a survey of 2,256 respondents, including 1,191 marketers and 1,065 consumers, predominantly in the United States. Marketers represented a cross-section of roles—content, social, paid media, analytics, growth, and creative—across career levels and company sizes.

Separate survey paths were used for marketers and consumers, enabling side-by-side comparisons of how each group uses and perceives AI. Typeform leveraged its own conversational logic, video, and audio response features to capture both quantitative trends and qualitative nuance.

While survey-based research always reflects a moment in time, the scale and cross-functional mix give the results weight—particularly as AI adoption continues to accelerate.

The Bigger Picture: AI Is Normal Now

If there’s one headline takeaway, it’s this: generative AI is no longer controversial inside marketing departments. It’s operational.

The real debate has moved beyond “Should we use AI?” to “How do we use it well?”

That shift reframes the competitive landscape. Early adopters gained speed. Now, nearly everyone has speed. The advantage comes from orchestration—how effectively teams integrate AI into workflows, safeguard brand voice, and leverage audience data.

And as Typeform’s data suggests, consumers aren’t policing tools as aggressively as many feared. They’re judging outcomes.

In a content-saturated market, that’s both liberating and sobering. AI may level the production playing field, but it doesn’t guarantee resonance. Quality, relevance, and authenticity still decide who earns attention—and trust.

For marketers, the message is clear: AI is baseline infrastructure. Human insight is the multiplier.

Get in touch with our MarTech Experts.