AI is often cited to justify layoffs but that masks how the labour market is actually distorted by it

Singapore-based Crypto.com said last week that it was cutting 12% of its workforce. Earlier, Atlassian and Block had cited AI adoption for job losses. But what’s lacking in these pronouncements is the evidence of how, exactly, AI is replacing workers.

Comprehensive data on whether Ai is destroying jobs, lifting productivity or reshuffling routine tasks remains patchy at best. And that vacuum is being filled with fear-mongering and market-friendly spin. No doubt, it is reshaping how people work, but for governments and business leaders to effectively react, far more data and transparency is needed.In a world where engagement algorithms shape public speech, the loudest voices are rarely the most nuanced.

Stories of white-collar bloodbaths have gone viral in recent weeks—and even moved markets —despite little hard evidence. The narrative is potent. But the bigger danger may not be that AI is causing a ‘jobocalypse,’ but that these headlines obscure how AI tools are being used to erode the entry-level roles that train tomorrow’s workforce.

This ‘AI washing’ becomes a distraction from the harder policy work required for periods of rapid technological change.Investors are rewarding AI washing, but should they? Recasting pandemic over-hiring and cyclical belt-tightening as innovation and efficiency may help send share prices higher in the near term, but they don’t vouch for sound fundamentals or wise management.The layoffs narrative does not neatly fit in Asia. In Japan, one survey found that nearly 30% of 246 listed companies were increasing their workforce after adopting AI. An OECD report published last October argued AI-induced job losses may be less common in Japan than elsewhere due to chronic labour shortages driven by