This month, strategy partnered with Leo Canada for a three-part series dissecting the agency’s annual HumanKind research. Leo’s chief strategy officer Tahir Ahmad and senior strategist Dr. Sarah Carpentier explored how younger Canadians, especially, are experiencing the world as we currently know it. The final column uses findings from the 2025 study to better understand a generation at the crossroads between social media and AI.

More than a year since the introduction of ChatGPT and other AI tools, Canadians remain divided on the impact of these technologies. While they have permeated, to some degree, aspects of our lives, opinions and adoption rates differ, particularly between students under academic pressure and the broader population. Canadians recognize the limits of these tools, especially concerning critical thinking, and carefully engage with them. This should tell marketers and brands something about how these technologies should be approached with caution and a human touch as well.

These are the final findings from our The HumanKind Study 2025.

AI’s mixed reception

It’s clear Canada remains on the AI adoption curve, with 51% of Canadians using generative AI at least occasionally and 49% choosing to rarely or never engage with the technology. Opinions are split – half of the population views AI as beneficial, while the other side sees its capabilities as exaggerated.

Young Canadians are particularly torn. Sixty-seven per cent of students use generative AI at least sometimes. While some outsiders may view AI tools in schoolwork as a form of cheating, many students consider them necessary to remain competitive. One could even compare academic life to competitive sports: If every other athlete in the race is doping, they also must to keep up. Even kids in high school feel the weight of their entire future hinging on every mark and grade. So, when it feels as if their lives are riding on marks, of course they are going use the tools available to excel. It’s a matter of “prompt or perish.”

But this reliance on AI comes with acknowledged risks. Although this technology helps students achieve better grades and keep pace with peers, 63% of Canadian students worry it undermines their ability to think critically and independently. They find themselves in a vicious cycle, aware that their reliance on AI may harm their long-term development, yet feeling compelled to use it to meet immediate academic demands.

This perception is not limited to students; the broader populace is similarily wary of AI’s potential to shape and limit human cognitive autonomy. Almost two-thirds of Canadians aged 16 to 45 are concerned about overuse and the potential for increasing dependency and overreliance on these technologies as sources of information.

The concerns spill into other areas too, notably on social media.

Social media: A double-edged sword

Social media, much like AI, serves as a double-edged sword. While it connects us more than ever, it simultaneously cultivates anxiety and isolation as discussed in the first column of this series. For Gen Z and millennials who grew up on social media, the impact is evident. But what does it mean for Gen Alpha, who are now growing up with generative AI? It’s clear that AI and social media are intertwined. AI doesn’t just assist, it directs what you see on social media – curating feeds, filtering search results and influencing online interactions. This raises questions about our control over the content we consume and its implications for our thoughts, opinions, purchases, voting behaviour and worldview. What does this mean for the next generation of critical thinkers who have never known a world without these influences? And Canadians are well aware of this as two thirds fear the manipulation fuelled by AI and social media.

So how are young Canadians coping? They recognize the algorithm is designed to keep them hooked so they’re pushing back and trying to set boundaries. They are scrolling smarter, not harder. Sixty-two per cent of Gen Z survey respondents have taken action to reduce social-media usage in the past year. They’re not just setting boundaries at work as we’ve seen in our previous column, they are also setting time limits for apps on their phones, building privacy into their social-media use and using caution in how much they use AI and for what reason. Gen Z, especially women, is leading the charge – but even they feel the tension between the urge to unplug vs. the fear of missing out on online culture.

Brands should hold on to their human touch

Now, for brands listening in, there’s a vital lesson here. Consumers know how algorithms shape attitudes, behaviours and even realities and they’re wary of the “opportunists” behind the code who are using it for their gain. But they’re ultimately OK with brands using AI – as long as they’re transparent about it and the benefits are clear. In this light, AI should be thought of as a tool to enhance consumers experiences. If AI is the paint, the human is still the artist. AI could let consumers imagine seeing how that new sofa fits in their living room or getting a personalized grocery list. Those are tangible benefits your audience can get behind.

At the end of the day, it’s about balance, benefits and keeping the human touch alive. Machines can do some incredible things, but they can’t replicate authentic human connection.

By Tahir Ahmad and Dr. Sarah Carpentier