By Paul Wallis
EDITOR AT LARGE
DIGITAL JOURNAL
January 16, 2026
A Bernstein Research analyst says Open AI CEO Sam Altman has the power to crash the global economy or take everyone 'to the promised land' as the startup behind ChatGPT races to build artificial intelligence infrastructure costing billions of dollars - Copyright GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP JUSTIN SULLIVAN
There are many points of access to ChatGPT Health with a single search. It’s a chat service that provides a range of services related to medical issues for consumers.
The recent launch of ChatGPT Health is “just” as a general information service, but the frames of reference are huge. It’s an interface for general information, which can be and has been construed as advice.
This Guardian article about ChatGPT Health spells out in clear and alarming terms what can go wrong and what has gone wrong, notably a case of someone taking sodium bromide instead of table salt.
To explain this problem a bit more succinctly:
AI draws on available data to process requests. The available data for sodium bromide is minimal and appalling. Even the manufacturers seem to have only so much information to work with.
This is what the AI would see:
General search data. It’s OK for a casual overview, but hardly at a diagnostic level. It does include safety and toxicity information.
Product information, such as it is. Note the many “No data available” entries on this info sheet.
So this guy takes sodium bromide, starts hallucinating, and winds up inthe hospital. Ironically, the toxicity information in the basic search includes hallucinations.
You can see how this works. How this guy got the idea that sodium bromide was a substitute for table salt is anyone’s guess. Maybe the fact that they both include sodium?
Now the major issue.
To coin an expression, this is “AI overreach”.
In the consumer’s case, he far overreached his own knowledge base. This kind of information simply doesn’t, can’t, and won’t translate into a quick fix for table salt or anything else.
In ChatGPT Health’s case, it’s a huge overreach. It’s one thing to simply recite factual information. To transpose that level of information into any sort of medical advice is out of the question.
One of the reasons online health has taken off is because it’s supposed to be basically the same service you’d get from a GP. It’s quick, it’s efficient, it saves time and money for both parties, and nobody has to risk their lives in traffic to treat a head cold.
AI health services like this are inevitably well out of their depth in these basic functions. They’re not subject to the same level of two-party scrutiny, either.
A GP and a patient could just both look at the same AI information and decide whether they believe it or trust it.
Sodium bromide certainly wouldn’t have passed this very basic level of scrutiny. A swimming pool disinfectant agent as table salt? Maybe not?
Regulation
Regulation could be easier than it looks, though. Under Australian law, a medical company cannot provide medical services. It’s also not a legal person. These are very important distinctions.
So how could an AI provide the same or similar services? AI isn’t a legal person, either. This could well extend to any form of medical advice.
As a therapeutic asset, AI could be regulated by the Therapeutic Goods Administration. It could only operate under general therapeutic regulations, with any number of safeguards built in. Note that the reasonable interpretation of “therapy” can easily include advisory services.
Why regulate?
Because otherwise any dangerous pseudo-medical product can enter the food chain. Because there are serious risks of major damage. Look how much fun America has with its meds, regulated or otherwise. It’s too high a risk.
Never mind “buyer beware”. Why should the buyer of anything have to beware of anything at all? What’s wrong with an obligation to market safe products?
A warning sticker saying “this product could exterminate your entire family” may be noble and uplifting and tell you what nice guys the manufacturers are, but why do you need it? Does “may contain plutonium” tell you enough?
In the case of sodium bromide, it’s a fair assumption that nobody seriously considered that it was a substitute for table salt. You shouldn’t need to be told that, but here’s a documented case of exactly that.
AI is destined to be a critical part of medicine. It needs to be safe.
Opinion: AI in advertising, or the absolute last thing you need is scripted sales spiel
By Paul Wallis
EDITOR AT LARGE
Huge investment announcements by ChatGPT-maker OpenAI this week boosted tech optimism but there are worries that the AI-fuelled rally may have run too far - Copyright AFP SEBASTIEN BOZON
It seems that life does go on, despite the news. Life now includes helpful AI agents to help you shop. Stop cheering.
Those of us blessed with AI in its role as yet another dogmatic, time-consuming, verbose commercial procedure aren’t cheering. Particularly those of us who’ve done mountains of advertising copy and sales materials.
Consider the process. You search for something you want to buy, and you get the usual formatted search, AI overview, and a sales pitch. Paid placements are quite bad enough. The whole search gets buried under the paid placements. Now add AI.
The current AI sector theory is that AI will be “persuasive”. Nice to know anyone’s that naïve, isn’t it?
No, it isn’t.
Say you want to buy a toaster. Legends say that back in the day your family used to own a toaster.
With the insanity of middle age, you and your ego decide that you will again aspire to such lofty social goals. You mad impetuous statistic, you.
So, despite the shudders from your family, total strangers, and a few squirrels, you search for a toaster.
Now, grudgingly consider the fact that there could be nothing easier than looking up info about your searches from data brokers to your search.
It’s a lot worse than that, and your consumer mudslide starts way up the market food chain.
You get all your past searches because it’s a search engine function to remember searches anyway. Yes, the AI can access that data. You hit Shopping and go to a site.
You also get AI business strategy, market planning, etc. It looks very like More Things You Can Do With Your Expensive New Toy For Businesses. This includes marketing, branding, and market positioning. You haven’t even clicked on a product yet.
All of this is based on one search.
The toasters arise from the products page. Some of them don’t even look like toasters. They look like someone’s trying to build a new alien civilization and couldn’t be bothered to tell you.
At this point you don’t need AI. You need a therapist up there in the tree with you.
But you get the AI. To quote from The Conversation link above:
A more recent meta-analysis of eight studies similarly concluded there was “no significant overall difference in persuasive performance between (large language models) and humans.”
This just means that the AI can process you to death or a sale, whichever comes first. You probably won’t get that invaluable condescension and implication that you’re unworthy of a toaster, though.
The usual “Behold! It casts its eyes upon our products, the wretch! Send a vassal to sneer it into submission!” is unlikely. You’d only get the impression that you should be a better person before daring to buy a toaster.
The AI will just obligingly tell you everything it wants you to know. Scripted spiel with a dialog box. Never mind what you want to know. It won’t understand your whimpers.
Nevertheless, you and your family will get an heirloom $19.99 toaster, eventually.
What does this have to do with advertising, you enquire wistfully from your burrow?
Nothing. Nothing at all. Do you see any real business value? The real sales pitch and trigger for everything is your search enquiry. You’ve already sold a toaster to yourself. The AI has simply reinforced your fears.
Successful salespeople don’t waste your time or theirs with superfluous garbage. In this case, they know that you want a toaster, but they also know that you may want to sing, dance, and frolic in the fields again. So, they keep the verbosity functional.
My suggestion from years of advertising work and statutory-level consumer protection work:
You need advertising in AI like you need a third armpit.
By Paul Wallis
EDITOR AT LARGE
DIGITAL JOURNAL
January 14, 2026
Huge investment announcements by ChatGPT-maker OpenAI this week boosted tech optimism but there are worries that the AI-fuelled rally may have run too far - Copyright AFP SEBASTIEN BOZON
It seems that life does go on, despite the news. Life now includes helpful AI agents to help you shop. Stop cheering.
Those of us blessed with AI in its role as yet another dogmatic, time-consuming, verbose commercial procedure aren’t cheering. Particularly those of us who’ve done mountains of advertising copy and sales materials.
Consider the process. You search for something you want to buy, and you get the usual formatted search, AI overview, and a sales pitch. Paid placements are quite bad enough. The whole search gets buried under the paid placements. Now add AI.
The current AI sector theory is that AI will be “persuasive”. Nice to know anyone’s that naïve, isn’t it?
No, it isn’t.
Say you want to buy a toaster. Legends say that back in the day your family used to own a toaster.
With the insanity of middle age, you and your ego decide that you will again aspire to such lofty social goals. You mad impetuous statistic, you.
So, despite the shudders from your family, total strangers, and a few squirrels, you search for a toaster.
Now, grudgingly consider the fact that there could be nothing easier than looking up info about your searches from data brokers to your search.
It’s a lot worse than that, and your consumer mudslide starts way up the market food chain.
You get all your past searches because it’s a search engine function to remember searches anyway. Yes, the AI can access that data. You hit Shopping and go to a site.
You also get AI business strategy, market planning, etc. It looks very like More Things You Can Do With Your Expensive New Toy For Businesses. This includes marketing, branding, and market positioning. You haven’t even clicked on a product yet.
All of this is based on one search.
The toasters arise from the products page. Some of them don’t even look like toasters. They look like someone’s trying to build a new alien civilization and couldn’t be bothered to tell you.
At this point you don’t need AI. You need a therapist up there in the tree with you.
But you get the AI. To quote from The Conversation link above:
A more recent meta-analysis of eight studies similarly concluded there was “no significant overall difference in persuasive performance between (large language models) and humans.”
This just means that the AI can process you to death or a sale, whichever comes first. You probably won’t get that invaluable condescension and implication that you’re unworthy of a toaster, though.
The usual “Behold! It casts its eyes upon our products, the wretch! Send a vassal to sneer it into submission!” is unlikely. You’d only get the impression that you should be a better person before daring to buy a toaster.
The AI will just obligingly tell you everything it wants you to know. Scripted spiel with a dialog box. Never mind what you want to know. It won’t understand your whimpers.
Nevertheless, you and your family will get an heirloom $19.99 toaster, eventually.
What does this have to do with advertising, you enquire wistfully from your burrow?
Nothing. Nothing at all. Do you see any real business value? The real sales pitch and trigger for everything is your search enquiry. You’ve already sold a toaster to yourself. The AI has simply reinforced your fears.
Successful salespeople don’t waste your time or theirs with superfluous garbage. In this case, they know that you want a toaster, but they also know that you may want to sing, dance, and frolic in the fields again. So, they keep the verbosity functional.
My suggestion from years of advertising work and statutory-level consumer protection work:
You need advertising in AI like you need a third armpit.
Opinion: Is open source AI the only trustworthy long-term way to develop AI?
By Paul Wallis
EDITOR AT LARGE
DIGITAL JOURNAL
January 5, 2026
While OpenAI does not expect to be profitable before 2029, the startup's valuation keeps climbing in funding rounds baffling some financial analysts
- Copyright AFP Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV
Unlike just about every new class of technology in history, AI has a unique ability to be universally despised. The ridiculous investment racket, combined with the actual performance and delivery of the product, makes it easy.
In coding terms, AI often looks more like slapstick comedy. The AI Keystone Codes go well with the Keystone Cops.
Inept, unreliable, farcical, and hallucinating software is nobody’s idea of a credible standard of performance. Certainly not business performance. One lousy prompt or a few random otherwise unemployable idiots can produce a MechaHitler.
This is your idea of a few trillion dollars’ worth of good investment? Ownership of this extremely expensive bad case of poultry diarrhea could be legal suicide in one process.
It’s called AI slop simply because it is sloppy.
Imagine this dialogue with an AI agent:
“What’s our current electricity load on the grid?” you ask hopefully.
“Oh, I dunno. How about a meaningless rabid political rant instead?” it replies with a simpering and generally inexcusable New York accent.
Great stuff.
No, it damn well isn’t.
Criticisms of turgid AI videos, endless repetitions of the same information, and the content curation of a dunghill are all perfectly valid and correct.
There’s no actual value in any of this garbage.
Now, let’s get a little less superficial.
This generation of ultra-smug AI isn’t and can’t be the whole story, thank god. Even allowing for the Rectal Rhapsodies of AI spruikers, it’s an interim stage before high-functioning AI can evolve.
This is where the heavy-duty professional criticism necessarily kicks in. it’s interesting to note that in the IT sector, where the real high-tech guys reproduce by fission, none of the AI BS flies at all.
These are the guys who evangelized the internet and every single electronic component since the Commodore 64 like proud parents. They know how derivative current AI is, glued on to much older software like writing and music software that is often decades older.
For the first time ever, the Ultra-Geeks and consumers are on the same page, if for some similar and some different reasons.
They agree that:
Big Tech is all about money and not about performance.
Corporate agendas are driving development for purely financial reasons.
Added ornaments like rumoured new hardware requirements for Windows 12 and everything else, and similar bric-a-brac are more obstacles than assets.
All of this is being done at a great distance from consumer needs, and the consumers don’t like it.
Why not put this externally sorta-maybe required but not consumer-essential junk on the Cloud, where it belongs?
This unsightly mess brings us elegantly if verbosely to the issue of open source AI development.
Open source development is a comparatively complex idea, but it’s essentially free. Open source has generated some of the most useful software ever developed.
The big issue for AI is that open source is also transparent. It can’t really be a corporate toy. There are overlaps, sure, but that’s inevitable. The intellectual property game, however, is very different.
Real development happens in people’s heads.
Some poor soul, floundering through cumbersome protocols and obscure IT idiocies will notice that there are workarounds. Anyone who’s ever done coding will tell you that workarounds are the main reasons that anything works at all. That’s pretty right.
Now, a bit of logic:
If corporate agendas distort efficient development, or more likely sidetrack it, open source is the way around those agendas.
Pure research, the only real gold standard for real tech breakthroughs, is unrestricted in the open source environment.
Talent isn’t and can’t be confined to a stingy 5-minute input in some useless meeting.
Open source is peer-reviewed and highly visible by definition. Its trustworthiness is based on actual performance, not some damn PR exercise.
Open source will finally free AI development. It’s that simple.
Unlike just about every new class of technology in history, AI has a unique ability to be universally despised. The ridiculous investment racket, combined with the actual performance and delivery of the product, makes it easy.
In coding terms, AI often looks more like slapstick comedy. The AI Keystone Codes go well with the Keystone Cops.
Inept, unreliable, farcical, and hallucinating software is nobody’s idea of a credible standard of performance. Certainly not business performance. One lousy prompt or a few random otherwise unemployable idiots can produce a MechaHitler.
This is your idea of a few trillion dollars’ worth of good investment? Ownership of this extremely expensive bad case of poultry diarrhea could be legal suicide in one process.
It’s called AI slop simply because it is sloppy.
Imagine this dialogue with an AI agent:
“What’s our current electricity load on the grid?” you ask hopefully.
“Oh, I dunno. How about a meaningless rabid political rant instead?” it replies with a simpering and generally inexcusable New York accent.
Great stuff.
No, it damn well isn’t.
Criticisms of turgid AI videos, endless repetitions of the same information, and the content curation of a dunghill are all perfectly valid and correct.
There’s no actual value in any of this garbage.
Now, let’s get a little less superficial.
This generation of ultra-smug AI isn’t and can’t be the whole story, thank god. Even allowing for the Rectal Rhapsodies of AI spruikers, it’s an interim stage before high-functioning AI can evolve.
This is where the heavy-duty professional criticism necessarily kicks in. it’s interesting to note that in the IT sector, where the real high-tech guys reproduce by fission, none of the AI BS flies at all.
These are the guys who evangelized the internet and every single electronic component since the Commodore 64 like proud parents. They know how derivative current AI is, glued on to much older software like writing and music software that is often decades older.
For the first time ever, the Ultra-Geeks and consumers are on the same page, if for some similar and some different reasons.
They agree that:
Big Tech is all about money and not about performance.
Corporate agendas are driving development for purely financial reasons.
Added ornaments like rumoured new hardware requirements for Windows 12 and everything else, and similar bric-a-brac are more obstacles than assets.
All of this is being done at a great distance from consumer needs, and the consumers don’t like it.
Why not put this externally sorta-maybe required but not consumer-essential junk on the Cloud, where it belongs?
This unsightly mess brings us elegantly if verbosely to the issue of open source AI development.
Open source development is a comparatively complex idea, but it’s essentially free. Open source has generated some of the most useful software ever developed.
The big issue for AI is that open source is also transparent. It can’t really be a corporate toy. There are overlaps, sure, but that’s inevitable. The intellectual property game, however, is very different.
Real development happens in people’s heads.
Some poor soul, floundering through cumbersome protocols and obscure IT idiocies will notice that there are workarounds. Anyone who’s ever done coding will tell you that workarounds are the main reasons that anything works at all. That’s pretty right.
Now, a bit of logic:
If corporate agendas distort efficient development, or more likely sidetrack it, open source is the way around those agendas.
Pure research, the only real gold standard for real tech breakthroughs, is unrestricted in the open source environment.
Talent isn’t and can’t be confined to a stingy 5-minute input in some useless meeting.
Open source is peer-reviewed and highly visible by definition. Its trustworthiness is based on actual performance, not some damn PR exercise.
Open source will finally free AI development. It’s that simple.
________________________________________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.
______________________________________________________________
Talk to me, Alexa: How conversational commerce is reshaping digital strategy
By Dr. Tim Sandle
SCIENCE EDITOR
Voice assistant. Image by Tim Sandle.
Voice assistants are changing the way consumers search, discover, and buy products online. From asking questions aloud to completing purchases, conversational commerce is partly shifting its digital strategy beyond screens.
Consequently, some brands need to adapt to this new voice-driven landscape, optimising content, structuring product data, and integrating AI chat to stay visible and relevant in this emerging channel.
In 2024, the number of active voice assistants surpassed 8.4 billion globally, more than the number of people on Earth. It is estimated that voice commands drive over $3.3 billion in consumer spending, and the channel is expected to reach $45 billion by 2028.
Up to 43% of voice-enabled device owners use their device to shop, with 51% using it to research products, 22% making purchases directly, and 17% reordering items.
As voice assistants and AI chat tools become household staples, the way consumers search, discover, and buy products is evolving.
According toLouis Riat-Bonello from Optisearch, conversational commerce is transforming digital marketing, requiring brands to rethink how they appear in search, engage audiences, and drive conversions. Riat-Bonello explains more to Digital Journal.
By Dr. Tim Sandle
SCIENCE EDITOR
DIGITAL JOURNAL
January 7, 2026
January 7, 2026
Voice assistant. Image by Tim Sandle.
Voice assistants are changing the way consumers search, discover, and buy products online. From asking questions aloud to completing purchases, conversational commerce is partly shifting its digital strategy beyond screens.
Consequently, some brands need to adapt to this new voice-driven landscape, optimising content, structuring product data, and integrating AI chat to stay visible and relevant in this emerging channel.
In 2024, the number of active voice assistants surpassed 8.4 billion globally, more than the number of people on Earth. It is estimated that voice commands drive over $3.3 billion in consumer spending, and the channel is expected to reach $45 billion by 2028.
Up to 43% of voice-enabled device owners use their device to shop, with 51% using it to research products, 22% making purchases directly, and 17% reordering items.
As voice assistants and AI chat tools become household staples, the way consumers search, discover, and buy products is evolving.
According toLouis Riat-Bonello from Optisearch, conversational commerce is transforming digital marketing, requiring brands to rethink how they appear in search, engage audiences, and drive conversions. Riat-Bonello explains more to Digital Journal.
Why Conversational Commerce Is Gaining Momentum
Voice assistants and conversational commerce refer to the use of spoken commands or chat-based interfaces to search for information, discover products, and complete purchases. Instead of typing queries or browsing traditional websites, consumers interact with AI-powered assistants, smart speakers, or on-site chat tools that guide them through the buying journey.
Monthly, Riat-Bonello says, 11.5% of smart speaker owners make purchases, equal to nearly 5.5 million US adults. 52% of owners are interested in deals and promotions, while 38% find voice ads less invasive and 39% find them more tempting than traditional ads. These behaviours show a clear opportunity for brands to reach audiences in ways traditional channels cannot.
From a marketing and commercial perspective, conversational commerce is gaining traction. Riat-Bonello says it is for the following reasons:Ease and convenience: Voice and chat remove friction by allowing users to search or shop hands-free, making it ideal for multitasking and on-the-go moments
Faster decision-making: Conversational interfaces often deliver direct answers or product recommendations, reducing the steps between intent and action
Growing consumer comfort with AI: As voice assistants and chatbots become more accurate, users increasingly trust them for everyday tasks, including shopping
Strong local and high-intent use cases: Voice searches are frequently local or transactional, creating opportunities for brands to capture customers ready to act
Seamless integration with daily life: Smart speakers, mobile assistants, and embedded chat tools make conversational commerce a natural extension of how people already use technology.
According to Riat-Bonello: “Voice search and conversational tools are changing how brands are found and how people shop online. When someone speaks to their assistant, they want a fast, accurate answer. That means businesses need to optimise content for natural, full-sentence queries, ensure product data is structured and reliable, and use AI-driven chat to guide customers to the right products.”
This is leading to adaptation. Riat-Bonello cites: “Smart brands are thinking beyond screens. Every voice query is a potential conversion, and every interaction shapes how consumers perceive your business. Voice shopping is not just a trend. It is becoming a core part of the customer journey, and businesses that adapt early will gain a real advantage.”
How Brands Can Optimise for Voice Commerce
Voice assistants like Siri, Alexa, and Google Assistant do not “browse” results. They aim to return one correct answer, not a list. For those seeking to market products using voice assistants, Riat-Bonello sees the best way to “appeal” to voice assistants is to:Ensure product and business data is fully structured using schema markup, including pricing, availability, reviews, and location details
Maintain consistent listings across Google Business Profile, Apple Maps, Amazon, and other trusted data sources used by voice assistants
Optimise content for natural, spoken queries by targeting full-sentence questions and intent-driven searches rather than short keywords
Build authoritative FAQ and support content that directly answers common “how,” “where,” and “best” queries users ask aloud
Strengthen local SEO signals, as many voice searches are location-based and action-oriented
Focus on reviews, ratings, and fulfilment reliability, which voice assistants use as confidence signals when selecting recommendations
Integrate AI-powered chat on websites to mirror conversational behaviour and guide users toward products or actions
Riat-Bonello adds that things should not simply stop here, since development is always necessary. He recommends regularly auditing product feeds, structured data, and listings to ensure accuracy as platforms and voice algorithms evolve.
No comments:
Post a Comment