• by Sarah Mahoney , Staff Writer, September 29, 2026

It’s been days since Walmart president and CEO John Furner posted a letter to customers promising that, even though it's pushing shoppers to use AI tools, it won’t use that AI against them. And retailers, tech pundits and consumer strategists are still trying to decide what Walmart’s letter means.

Walmart may see the play as a way to get ahead of shifting public opinion and become known as a brand committed to fair pricing, much as Apple has tied its branding to privacy concerns.

But owning that perception won’t be easy, with consumers’ anti-AI sentiment growing almost as fast as marketers adopt the technology. Most consumers may not believe that AI is trying to kill them, but plenty are pretty convinced businesses are using it to squeeze more money out of them.

A recent study from Gallup and Bentley University found that trust in businesses to use AI responsibly declined this year, with the erosion steepest among 18- to 29-year-olds, falling from 30% to 20%. That research was fielded in May, even before major AI companies revealed their inability to vouch for AI safety.

Furner’s letter to customers also follow news about new patents from Walmart, including a system that can automatically change markdowns on the retailer’s website.  Another could predict demand and recommend prices.

This comes as the company rolls out digital shelf labels, even offering consumers a cartoon tutorial on how the technology works.

The timing of the letter suggests that Walmart, which has invested billions of marketing dollars in its “everyday low prices” positioning, knows how big the stakes are. And competitively, it needs to move quickly -- especially in positioning itself against Amazon, its biggest rival, which is routinely ranked as consumers’ most-trusted retail brand.

The letter also landed as Federal Trade Commission comments closed on a proposal targeting undisclosed personalized pricing. Just days ago, Seattle became the first city to ban surveillance pricing in grocery stores, as some advocates called it “AI-powered price gouging.” Several states have also restricted the practice.

Right now, awareness of the practice is low. A poll in Colorado found that almost three-quarters of voters had heard little or nothing about the issue. It doesn’t help that there are so many buzzwords: Is it dynamic pricing, or surveillance pricing? Is it selective, or personalized?

But once surveillance pricing is explained, 78% in Colorado support a ban. In a larger national study, 76% feel that way.

Surveillance pricing allows retailers to charge substantially more, with consumers unlikely to detect the unfairness. One study, from Consumer Reports, Groundwork Collaborative, and More Perfect Union, had 400 people shop the same Instacart basket at the same time. It revealed price gaps as high as 23% on some items: Customers shopping at the same Safeway in Washington D.C. were shown prices between $3.99 and $4.79 for the same dozen eggs. Consumer Reports estimated the practice could cost families more than $1,200 a year.

As awareness grows, the issue is becoming increasingly newsworthy, not just for groceries, but in high-profile recent allegations about pricing at Uber, Lyft, a lawsuit against JetBlue and even Walmart.

Atlanta station WSB-TV, working with sister stations, found different prices at the same time for a TV on Walmart’s website. WSB reports that Walmart didn’t respond to the station’s request for comment, but posted the CEO’s letter the next day.

“AI has added incredible new ways for us to serve our customers and members, and it rightfully also raises questions about the information it has access to,” Furner wrote in the letter. “Understanding our customers and members is what makes us special and allows us to better serve them.”

What’s tricky is that the store is encouraging shoppers to lean more heavily on Sparky, its AI shopping tool, which tracks the same type of behaviors used in surveillance pricing. “When you engage with Sparky, that’s an invitation to serve you better, not to use your personal information to set a personalized price,” Furner wrote.

It’s unclear what all this might mean for Walmart Connect, its fast-growing ad business, which also depends on the trust consumers have with the brand. It’s also unclear how the promise that Sparky won’t hide lower-priced options holds up against sponsored product placements.

The big question, of course, is whether an average consumer will believe Furner. Should they? Or will it be one more way people feel manipulated by big tech?

Trust and fair pricing are Walmart’s competitive weapons. Can they stay sharp in the AI era?