MAM
Humans hesitate, bots decide: 2026 to reset the rules of marketing
MUMBAI: Performance marketing is entering a harder, sharper, more automated era. Inflation is cooling, consumers are still bruised, AI is everywhere and trust is scarce. The result: fewer vanity metrics, more machine-led buying and a ruthless focus on returns. That is the thrust of a 2026 trends report by affect, a growth marketing agency, which synthesises more than 100 industry studies into 70 “trend facts” spanning the economy, media, technology and business.
The macro mood is cautiously steadier but fragile. Global inflation is forecast to ease from 4.2 per cent in 2025 to 3.6 per cent in 2026, yet consumers feel an “inflation echo” from cumulative price rises. Seventy-three per cent of those who feel worse off blame living costs. A basket that cost $100 in 2023 will cost $106 in 2026. Healthcare prices are up 5.4 per cent, snacks and confectionery 4.9 per cent and non-alcoholic drinks 3.6 per cent. Seventy-four per cent worldwide worry about everyday costs, now a bigger concern than climate change or unemployment.
Growth continues but nerves linger. Global GDP is seen expanding 3.1 per cent. Conflicts have jumped from the fifth to the second biggest global worry, up 9 per cent year on year; political instability ranks seventh. In America, 42 per cent say finances have improved or stabilised and the financially insecure share has fallen to 17 per cent. Only 8.5 per cent say they are “much worse” off than a year ago. Still, nearly half of households have nothing left after essentials. Seventy-eight per cent plan to boost emergency savings, 60 per cent seek extra income and 36 per cent aim to clear credit-card debt. Yet 36 per cent are willing to take short-term debt for pleasure, a nod to “Treatonomics”. Meanwhile, 77 per cent in North America expect unemployment to rise.
Age holds the money. Over-65s control 50 per cent of American household wealth. Gen Z is the richest young cohort yet: the average 25-year-old Gen Z household earns $40,000, but its spending is rising twice as fast as predecessors.
In the aisles, trust and value rule. Tariffs have pushed U.S. import prices 5.4 per cent above trend. The average American FMCG basket is $36, up 4 per cent. Sixty-two per cent cite trust as the decisive brand factor, versus 56 per cent in 2024; 75 per cent want brands to respond faster. Physical retail still delivers 77 per cent of FMCG sales. Households make 294 store visits a year, spend $8,222 in-store and $2,737 online. Food and beverage leads budgets at $7,127 a year.
Consumers still trade down: 79 per cent globally do so, often cutting basics to fund treats. Thirty-two per cent switch to cheaper brands. Thirty per cent buy private label; U.S. private labels are growing 5.5 per cent versus 6 per cent for national brands. Speed increasingly trumps price: food delivery’s share of foodservice spend has leapt from 9 per cent in 2019 to 21 per cent in 2024. More than half of U.S. households now seek financial advice, the highest since 2008, and 44 per cent turn to social media for it.
Authenticity is fraying. Over half of consumers question online content because of AI. Seventy-six per cent struggle to tell real from synthetic images; a third have faced deepfakes or AI fraud. Real-world contact is regaining allure: 42 per cent say physical events are the week’s highlight versus 15 per cent for digital; 79 per cent of Gen Z prefer in-person dating. Sixty-eight per cent stress self-reliance in health and finance. While 64 per cent like personalisation, 32 per cent are uneasy about data use. Seventy per cent track health via apps or wearables.
Discovery is social and omnichannel. Half of adults find brands via social platforms; Instagram leads research. Sixty-three per cent of Gen Z say social ads drive purchases. The average buyer uses 3.6 channels to buy food. People have three extra free hours a week, but spend 90 per cent of it alone. Daily time online averages six hours and 38 minutes. Fifty-five per cent prefer fast solutions and lean on “collective intelligence” online, even for health and money. Social commerce keeps rising, though Western markets fret about payments.
Media habits are splitting by age. Gen Z spends 50 more minutes on social media and 44 fewer minutes on TV and film than the average consumer. Subscription fatigue is biting: four streaming services now cost $69 a month, up 13 per cent. Nearly half feel they overpay; 39 per cent cancelled at least one service in six months, over half among young cohorts. Cable penetration has slid from 63 per cent to 49 per cent in three years. Yet linear TV still claims 57 per cent of viewing time, anchored by older audiences, news and sport.
Search remains the top discovery channel at 32.8 per cent, but among 16–34s social ads lead. YouTube dominates time spent, TikTok leads engagement at roughly 35 hours a month per Android user. Facebook still counts 2.3bn users but with falling engagement; Instagram beats TikTok in ad reach. Social ads and reviews sway 63 per cent of Gen Z and 49 per cent of Millennials; streaming ads far less. Half of young users feel closer to creators than TV celebrities. Social media is deemed least trustworthy, yet 29 per cent still buy from it. As platforms hoard attention, news outlets lose revenue and rely more on algorithms, a risk to quality.
AI is the backbone. Fifty-three per cent of Americans already use generative AI. ChatGPT counts 800m weekly users, about 10 per cent of humanity. Forty per cent of brands plan to deploy GenAI; 70 per cent of marketers budget for it expecting revenue gains. Twenty-four per cent of AI users shop with assistants. Seventy-four per cent of B2B and B2B2C firms use AI agents; by end-2026, 40 per cent of enterprise apps will embed them. By 2029, AI may handle 80 per cent of routine customer service.
Amazon has rolled out one million AI-driven robots, lifting warehouse efficiency 10 per cent. Algorithmic systems will manage 71.6 per cent of global ad spend. Trust in neobanks lags at 30 per cent versus 67 per cent for regional banks; Gen Z prefers debit. A quarter plan crypto investments, often peer-led. Discomfort persists: 58 per cent feel uneasy dealing with AI brands, 86 per cent still value humans, yet 80 per cent want AI in service. “AI shoppers” or digital twins are expected to buy autonomously.
For marketers, the playbook is being rewritten. Retail media networks are becoming the prime performance channel, forecast to grow 14.1 per cent and absorb over 20 per cent of digital ad spend, expanding off-site into CTV and the open web. Generative AI is turning video into mass-customised production; 42 per cent already use AI for personalisation. SEO is giving way to GEO—generative engine optimisation—as AI agents choose products. One-fifth of B2B vendors may negotiate with bots by 2026.
Budgets are tilting to hard returns. Programmatic buying is moving to curated private marketplaces, now taking 66 per cent of open-market spend. Everything is becoming shoppable, from social feeds to CTV, where 60 per cent of buyers expect interactive commerce. Mobile will command 66 per cent of digital budgets. As privacy dents attribution, marketers are reviving marketing-mix modelling to tie spend to revenue, margins and lifetime value. Influencer marketing is being judged on ROI; 61 per cent of marketers plan to spend more on creators. With 79 per cent of consumers hunting value and 55 per cent ready to switch brands, “smart frugality” is the tone.
At the corporate level, 68.7 per cent of global ad spend will be digital in 2026. Firms report 5–10x ROI on AI agents. Eighty-six per cent of advertisers plan to use GenAI for video; 40 per cent of video ads will be AI-made or enhanced. Unilever alone aims to work with 300,000 creators, 20 times more than now. Linear TV is set to fall 4.2 per cent and then flatline; CTV ad spend will jump 13.6 per cent past $37bn. Fifty-four per cent of buyers will raise performance budgets versus 22 per cent for brands. ROI is the top criterion for 84 per cent of CMOs. Support from CEOs and CFOs for long-term brand building has slipped to 69 per cent, though 83 per cent of CMOs still see brand as a core asset. Meanwhile, 60 per cent of employees fear GenAI will raise stress and burnout.
Affect’s conclusions are blunt. Marketing must address both humans and machines as AI agents start buying. Trust is the new currency in a world of deepfakes. Retail media is the growth engine. SEO must evolve into GEO. Treatonomics rewards small joys. Offline experiences are reviving. Influencer marketing is industrialising. AI adoption must be cultural, not just technical. Older consumers—the “silver economy”—deserve more attention. And with ROI pressure peaking, the era of experimentation is giving way to execution.
In short: the future buyer may be a bot, the future metric a sale, and the future brand one that machines and humans both trust. In 2026, marketing grows up—and the excuses run out.
MAM
Worldwide Travel Insurance for Indian Travellers: How to Find a Plan Without Geographic Gaps in Your Protection
Travelling to more than one country can make insurance selection more complex, because a policy that looks broad at first may still leave certain destinations, transit points, or regions outside its scope. For Indian travellers, this can lead to gaps in cover during a medical emergency or travel disruption abroad.
Here’s a guide to understanding how worldwide coverage works, which plan types to review, and how to check for geographic exclusions before choosing a policy.
Why Geographic Coverage Matters in Travel Insurance
When travellers look for the best travel insurance, medical cover and premium often get early attention, but geographic scope matters just as much. A policy may appear broad while still limiting cover in certain countries, regions, or travel routes.
This can affect hospital access, emergency support, evacuation terms, and non-medical benefits. For Indian travellers visiting more than one destination, checking where the policy applies is an important way to avoid gaps in protection.
Types of Worldwide Travel Insurance Plans Available to Indians
Worldwide travel insurance may be available in different formats, and each one should be reviewed based on the route, trip pattern, and list of destinations.
Single-Trip Travel Insurance
This type of policy is generally chosen for one overseas journey with fixed departure and return dates. It may suit travellers visiting one country or more than one destination during the same trip. The policy still needs to be checked carefully to confirm whether every destination on the itinerary is covered during the full travel period.
Multi-Trip Annual Insurance
This type of plan may be suitable for travellers who visit different countries several times a year. It can be useful only when the policy’s covered regions match the countries included across those trips. Before choosing it, travellers should check trip duration limits, region-wise exclusions, and whether all intended destinations are covered under the annual plan.
Region-Specific Plans
Some policies are built for selected regions rather than for the whole world. These plans may be arranged by destination groups such as Asia, Europe, or broader international zones. They may be suitable in some cases, but they should be reviewed carefully if the journey includes stopovers, connecting countries, or travel beyond the listed region.
Comprehensive Worldwide Plans
These plans are usually reviewed by travellers who want broader international cover across multiple destinations. However, a plan described as worldwide may still have country-wise limits, separate terms for certain regions, or limits on healthcare access and emergency services. The wording should therefore be checked in detail before relying on the description alone.
Key Coverage Areas That Ensure Global Protection
A worldwide policy should be reviewed for the coverage points that matter when travel includes more than one country or a wider international route. These areas help show whether the plan is suitable for broader overseas travel and not limited to only a few listed destinations.
● Cover that applies to all countries listed in the itinerary, not only the main destination.
● Cover for transit stops and connecting countries that are part of the planned journey.
● Clear mention of excluded countries, restricted regions, or destinations not covered under the policy.
● Emergency medical and assistance support that remains available while travelling across different countries.
● Evacuation and repatriation terms that continue to apply during multi-country travel.
How to Check for Geographic Exclusions Before Buying
Geographic exclusions are often found in the detailed wording rather than in the headline promise of the plan. A careful review before purchase can help travellers understand whether the policy matches their travel route.
● Check the destination list in the policy schedule.
● Read whether excluded countries, sanctioned regions, or restricted zones are mentioned in the wording.
● Review whether transit stops and connecting destinations are mentioned as covered travel locations.
● Check if medical network access differs across countries even when the policy appears globally valid.
● Read whether adventure activities, cruises, or remote locations have separate geographic conditions.
● Review assistance and claim support terms to see if they apply equally across all covered destinations.
Conclusion
A travel insurance plan cannot be judged only by premium, destination label, or the word worldwide term alone. For Indian travellers, geographic scope needs close attention because exclusions and regional limits may affect how the policy works during the journey. A careful review of plan type, covered locations, medical support, and destination-specific terms may help reduce avoidable gaps.
