Advertising in ChatGPT in the United States unleashes a debate on income and trust

OpenAI has started to experiment with ads in ChatGPT in the United States for free users and for those who pay the $8 a month go plan, a decision that has revived the debate on how big language models should be financed and what impact that will have on the user's experience and confidence. The company claims that the ads will not alter the answers and that the most advanced payment subscriptions, such as Plus, Pro, Business or Enterprise, will remain free of advertising, but the measure marks a turning point in the relationship between the conversational attendees and the commercial interests.

In parallel, Google DeepMind has tried to mark distance. Demis Hassalis, CEO of DeepMind, confirmed in several media statements during the Davos Economic Forum that, for now, Gemini won't have any ads. This position - more cautious in appearance - does not amount to a permanent refusal to introduce advertising in the future, but it does underline a different strategy: to prioritize, at least at this time, the experience without ads in Google's product. You can read about the public positions of DeepMind and Google on their official pages and in the coverage of the technological press, such as the The Verge and the general reports of Reuters.

The OpenAI test format shows discrete ads at the end of a response when there is a relevant sponsor regarding the subject under discussion. Depending on the public description of the test, users will be able to know why they see an ad, download it and provide feedback on its relevance. In addition, OpenAI has stated that it will not show publicity in conversations dealing with health, mental or political health, a restriction that seeks to avoid ethical or informative conflict on sensitive issues.

This strategy seems to meet two immediate needs: on the one hand, to keep a free version of the service available to a wide audience; on the other, to generate additional income without touching the subscriber plans that pay for a premium experience. It's a pragmatic move. but not without difficult questions: how is it guaranteed that the ads are really relevant and transparent? What data are used to decide what ads to show and in what context? Will impartiality and clarity be maintained when the model recommends products or services related to user consultation?

The answer to these questions has confidence implications. When an assistant becomes a channel of both information and advertising, the user's perception can change: even clearly labelled as sponsored content can make it doubt whether the main response was influenced. It is therefore important that, according to the information available, OpenAI allows to rule out the ads and explain why they appear; they are basic control mechanisms that help to maintain transparency, but are not a total solution to the inherent tensions between monetization and credibility.

In terms of competition, Google's decision not to include ads in Gemini by now places both players in different market positions. While OpenAI explores direct advertising revenues at the most basic access levels, Google seems to bet on another route, at least publicly, which can play in the user's perception of neutrality and service quality. The result could affect the use share and preference of certain user segments: from consumers who prioritize free of charge even with ads, to professionals and companies who would pay for an experience without them.

They are not just commercial considerations: advertising in conversational attendees reopens regulatory and privacy debates. The conversational nature of these tools makes it possible to collect very detailed context on personal intentions, interests and problems; this increases the value of information for advertisers, but also increases the risk to people's privacy rights. This is why organizations and regulators will be attentive to how data are handled, what transparency is offered and what control options are given to users. For a broad view of these issues, it is worth reviewing analysis and guides on digital advertising and privacy of specialized media and regulatory bodies, such as those published by Wired or more general reports of BBC.

It is also appropriate to look at the visual format that these ads usually take in tests: discrete containers with image to the left and text to the right, a design designed to integrate without breaking the reading, and clear buttons to act or close the notice. This type of design attempts to balance visibility and not intrusion, but the real experience will depend much on the quality of segmentation and the relevance of the sponsored content in each conversation.

Finally, the OpenAI play and Google's response reflect two different sustainability models for a technology that consumes significant resources: the cost of training and cloud deployment does not go away, and companies must find how to sustain investment. If advertising is the path chosen by some players, it will remain to be seen how regulation evolves, how users react and if that model finally impacts on long-term confidence and adoption. Meanwhile, public discussion and follow-up by journalists, researchers and regulators will be key to making these decisions more transparent and accountable.

To follow the official news and statements you can see the pages of the companies: OpenAI and DeepMind and the press coverage specialized in technology such as The Verge or international reports of Reuters which often synthesize public statements and the market context.