To what extent are companies that have recently reduced staff genuinely restructuring their teams to meet the demands and opportunities of artificial intelligence? Conversely, how many are simply employing AI as a convenient pretext to mask deeper organizational issues? This central dilemma is explored in a recent New York Times piece examining the practice of "AI-washing," wherein businesses attribute workforce reductions to AI when the true causes may stem from other factors, such as excessive hiring in prior years.

In 2025 alone, artificial intelligence was cited as the justification for over 50,000 job cuts, with major firms like Amazon and Pinterest pointing to the technology when announcing recent reductions. However, a Forrester report from January contends that numerous companies announcing AI-linked layoffs lack fully developed and validated AI applications ready to assume those responsibilities. The report underscores a growing tendency to attribute financially driven cuts to anticipated AI integration.

Molly Kinder, a senior research fellow at the Brookings Institute, observed that framing layoffs as AI-driven delivers a "very investor-friendly message." This approach often serves as a preferable alternative to acknowledging more troubling realities, such as admitting that "the business is ailing."