麦当劳和沃尔玛正处于防御状态，针对关于它们如何使用人工智能和客户数据来设定价格的指控。
McDonald's and Walmart are in defense mode over allegations about how they use AI and customer data to set prices.
为何重要：可负担性和人工智能是当前公司面临的两个最具政治敏感性的问题。
Why it matters:Affordability and AI are two of the most politically sensitive issues facing companies right now.
将二者结合，像复杂的定价工具这样的事物就可能成为声誉危机的导火索。
Combine them, and something as complicated as sophisticated pricing tools can become a reputational flashpoint.
新闻焦点：麦当劳过去一周一直在驳斥路透社关于其向特许经营商提供定价建议技术的报道。
Driving the news: McDonald's spent the past week pushing back against a Reuters report on the technology it uses to make pricing recommendations to franchisees.
该问题在周二升级，麦当劳对一项引用路透社报道并指称该系统促成特许经营商之间价格协同的联邦集体诉讼提案作出回应。
The issue escalated Tuesday, when McDonald's responded to a proposed federal class-action lawsuit citing Reuters' reporting and alleging the system facilitates price coordination among franchisees.
麦当劳表示，该诉讼“充满不准确之处”，并称特许经营商自行设定价格。宏观视角：消费者已经对企业的价格和人工智能持怀疑态度。
McDonald's said the lawsuit is "filled with inaccuracies" and that franchisees set their own prices. The big picture: Consumers are already primed to be skeptical of companies on both prices and AI.
根据2026年Bentley‑Gallup《商业与社会》调查，80%的美国人认为企业为了增加利润而不必要地提高了价格。
80% of Americans believe businesses have raised prices more than necessary to increase their profits, according to the 2026 Bentley-Gallup Business in Society survey.
只有27%的人对企业在使用人工智能时负责任的程度表示至少有一定信任，低于去年的31%。
27% trust businesses at least somewhat to use AI responsibly, down from 31% last year.
该调查在5月4日至11日对3270名美国成年人（18岁及以上）进行抽样。细节聚焦：沃尔玛也在进行类似的舆论争夺。
The survey polled 3,270 U.S. adults, aged 18 and older, between May 4-11. Zoom in: Walmart is fighting a similar framing battle.
首席执行官约翰·弗纳上个月发布公开信，向顾客承诺沃尔玛不会利用他们的收入、购物历史、紧迫感或对价格的感知意愿来提高收费。
CEO John Furner published an open letter last month promising customers that Walmart won't use their income, shopping history, urgency or perceived willingness to pay to charge them more.
公司建立了一个“每日可负担性”中心，提供常见问题解答、资料表和数字货架标签的说明。
The company has built an "Everyday Affordability" hub with FAQs, fact sheets and explanations of its digital shelf labels.
沃尔玛企业事务主管丹·巴特利特本周在X平台上挑战Groundwork Collaborative首席执行官林赛·欧文斯，批评她将沃尔玛作为数字货架标签可能导致的例子——比如炎热天气下冰淇淋价格上涨——进行引用。
Walmart corporate affairs chief Dan Bartlett took to X this week to challenge Groundwork Collaborative CEO Lindsay Owens over her use of Walmart as an example of what digital shelf labels could enable — think higher ice cream prices on hot days.
巴特利写道：“能够更快地更新显示屏，并不证明沃尔玛正在使用它，也没有打算将其用于动态定价。”他强调，沃尔玛不会将该技术用于动态定价或个性化定价。
"The ability to update a display more quickly is not evidence that Walmart uses it, nor intends to use it, for dynamic pricing," Bartlett wrote, emphasizing Walmart won't use the technology for dynamic or individualized pricing.
欧文则回应称：“围绕沃尔玛定价做法的混乱局面是其咎由自取。沃尔玛在给客户的危机公关信中说一套，在闭门会议上面对投资者时说另一套，而向美国专利商标局提交的则是完全不同的一套。”字里行间：这两家公司正在采用许多相同的沟通策略：划清明确红线：人工智能并不决定麦当劳的价格。沃尔玛不对个人进行差异化定价。让高层领导亲自为这些承诺背书，而不是由新闻发言人出面反驳。
"The confusion around Walmart's pricing practices is of its own making," Owens responded. "Walmart says one thing in its damage-control letters to customers, another to its investors behind closed doors, and a different thing entirely to the United States Patent and Trademark Office." Between the lines: The two companies are using many of the same communications tactics: Draw clear red lines: AI doesn't set McDonald's prices. Walmart doesn't price individual people. Put senior leaders behind those pledges instead of having spokespeople push back.
建立自有阵地——包括情况说明、常见问题解答和微型网站，供记者、员工和其他利益相关者参考引用。然而：针对特定受众的信息并不会仅仅停留在该受众群体中。
Build owned assets — explainers, FAQs and microsites — that reporters, employees and other stakeholders can point to. Yes, but: Messages built for one audience don't stay with just that audience.
在上个月的投资者日上，麦当劳表示其定价引擎“得益于数百万笔交易的洞察和广泛的市场数据”，并大肆宣传其应用程序收集的数据如何有助于训练人工智能。
During last month's investor day, McDonald's said its pricing engine is "informed by insights from millions of transactions and a broad range of market data" and touted how data collected through its app can help train AI.
沃尔玛在2023年的一项专利中解释了其标签如何根据购物者购物车中的商品“以动态方式”改变。
In a 2023 patent, Walmart explained how its labels could change "in a dynamic fashion" depending on the items a shopper has in their cart.
在投资者听来是明智的商业策略，或者在专利局听来是创新产品的东西，一旦重新包装面向消费者，听起来就会完全不同。
What sounds like smart business strategy to investors or an innovative product to patent agencies can sound different when reframed to consumers.
西蒙的思考：上周，我阐述了为什么符合常识的新闻框架很难被打破。
Simon's thought bubble: Last week, I described why news frames that feel like common sense can be difficult to dislodge.
这是一个近乎完美的例子：大多数美国人认为企业在过度涨价，并且不信任企业会负责任地使用人工智能。
This is a near-perfect example: Most Americans think companies are raising prices more than necessary and don't trust businesses to use AI responsibly.
因此，关于大公司正利用人工智能从客户身上榨取更多钱财的说法很容易引起共鸣。
So claims that powerful corporations are using AI to squeeze more dollars out of customers resonate.
这并不意味着这些说法就是真的，但确实意味着反驳工作从一开始就处于劣势。底线是：当争议如此激烈时，仅靠技术精确可能不足以解决问题。
That doesn't make the claims true, but it does mean the rebuttals start from behind. The bottom line: When the issues are this charged, technical precision might not be enough.