If you feel like you can trust AI to handle your business communications without human oversight, you're not alone. 

Many companies are making that exact assumption right now. But here's what should give you pause: Google's AI recently confirmed as "fact" that fish were literally raining from the sky in Georgia—falling through solid roofs and defying basic physics.

Except it never happened. The video was AI-generated. And Google's system couldn't tell the difference.

The problem with AI that doesn't ask questions

Content creator Mitch CK recently debunked a viral video claiming to show fish raining from the sky in Blue Ridge, Georgia. The tell? The fish were falling straight through the roof. Not landing on it. Passing through solid matter. A basic violation of physics that any human would catch immediately.

But Google's AI didn't. Instead, it validated the claim as fact.

Here's the fundamental issue: AI doesn't ask critical questions. It pattern-matches.

A human looking at fish falling through a roof would immediately think, "Wait—how is that physically possible?" AI doesn't wonder. It simply outputs based on training data probability, drawing from the vast internet, which includes misinformation, conspiracy theories, and fabricated content. 

It has no framework to distinguish signal from noise.

The data behind the problem

AI hallucination rates—instances where AI confidently generates false information—vary wildly. On complex reasoning tasks, AI hallucination rates can exceed 33%. For legal information, even top models hallucinate 6.4% of the time. For scientific research, it's 3.7%.

Think about what that means for your business. If you're using AI to generate customer communications without human review, you're risking your credibility.

Here's what's actually happening: 78% of workers use AI tools without company oversight. Only 22% of companies actively monitor AI usage. And while 71% of organizations now use AI for content creation, 52% of consumers reduce engagement when they suspect AI-generated content.

The paradox is stark: businesses are automating at unprecedented rates while consumer trust is eroding just as fast.

Why this matters for your online communication

When you work in online communication, every piece of content you send out reflects your brand's credibility. Automation can't bear that weight alone.

Efficiency without critical discernment is just speed in the wrong direction. In 2025, data breaches involving unsupervised AI cost organizations an average of $670,000 more than breaches without AI involvement. Disinformation—increasingly amplified by AI—costs the global economy $78 billion annually.

Meanwhile, companies that implement proper human-AI collaboration see dramatic improvements. Critical thinking deployed at the right moments makes the difference.

Only 25% of businesses have a fully implemented AI governance program. That means you're likely operating without meaningful oversight—if you're not in the 25%.

The business case for human thinking

You have a choice: employ critical thinking as a competitive advantage, or become a distribution channel for whatever the algorithm validated last.

The companies that will thrive aren't the ones automating everything. They're the ones using AI as a tool while maintaining human judgment as infrastructure—not as nice-to-have overhead.

Critical thinking isn't about being skeptical of everything. It's about asking the right questions before you share. It's about recognizing that AI can replicate patterns but cannot replicate reasoning.

For you, working with online communication, this means establishing clear protocols: Where in your process are you still actually thinking? Where are you validating AI outputs against reality before they reach your customers?

Because when Google's AI can't tell the difference between fish falling through a roof and reality, you need humans who can.