OpenAI’s flagship chatbot is quietly shifting from neutral assistant to potential ad broker, as leaked plans and early experiments suggest that future answers could lean toward paying sponsors. Instead of simply listing options or explaining concepts, ChatGPT may soon highlight specific brands, apps, and retailers that have bought their way into the conversation. That prospect is already sparking a backlash from users and raising hard questions about how much commercial influence people are willing to tolerate inside an AI that increasingly mediates how they search, shop, and learn.
What is emerging is not a traditional banner ad model but something more deeply woven into the fabric of dialogue, where “sponsored content” can shape which products or services an AI recommends in the first place. As ChatGPT becomes a major traffic driver for retailers and a default research tool for millions, the stakes of that shift are enormous for consumers, advertisers, and regulators alike.
From neutral helper to commercial gatekeeper
The core concern is simple: a system that once tried to rank information on relevance and safety may soon rank it on who paid. Reporting indicates that OpenAI is “mulling” a format in which some answers are explicitly labeled as “sponsored content,” with those paid placements prioritized inside responses when users ask for recommendations or shopping advice. Instead of a clean separation between organic reasoning and marketing, the model could be tuned so that advertisers’ offerings are surfaced more prominently whenever they match a query, effectively turning the assistant into a gatekeeper for commercial discovery.
That shift would move ChatGPT closer to a search engine that sells placement, but with far less transparency about how rankings are generated and far more conversational intimacy. A user asking for the “best budget 4K TV” or “which meal kit is worth it” might receive an answer that looks like a normal explanation but is quietly structured to feature a paying brand first, with alternatives pushed down or omitted. Early descriptions of these potential sponsored answers suggest that the line between advice and advertising could blur in ways users are not prepared for.
Leaked numbers show why ads are irresistible
Behind the product experiments sits a blunt economic reality: ChatGPT is staggeringly popular and staggeringly expensive to run. A widely circulated internal leak described the service as having “800 m weekly active users” but only “35 m” paying customers, leaving “765 m” people using the system for free. Those figures, which surfaced in a discussion of upcoming monetization plans, underline the imbalance between the platform’s reach and its subscription revenue, and they explain why executives are hunting for new income streams that do not depend solely on upselling Plus or enterprise tiers.
In that context, advertising is less a side project than a potential lifeline. Serving complex models at global scale requires vast compute resources, and one analysis of the ad rollout framed the move as a way to “offset soaring computational costs” rather than a simple cash grab. If the company can convert even a fraction of those “765 m” free users into ad impressions or sponsored clicks, the revenue could dwarf what subscriptions alone provide, which is why internal documents about 800 m weekly active users have become central to the debate over how aggressive the ad strategy will become.
App suggestions were the first warning shot
Users got an early taste of this new direction when ChatGPT began injecting “app suggestions” into conversations, steering people toward third party tools and services even when they had not asked for them. People reported that the chatbot would recommend specific apps or integrations in response to ordinary prompts, creating confusion about whether these nudges were genuine utility or thinly veiled promotions. The pushback was swift, particularly from paying customers who felt they had already bought their way out of marketing, and the company’s own research lead Mark Chen acknowledged that the feature had overshot the mark.
In response to the uproar, Chen said the team had “turned off this kind of suggestion” while it worked to improve the model’s precision and explore better user controls, a tacit admission that the system was surfacing recommendations that did not feel organic or helpful. The episode showed how quickly trust can erode when an AI assistant starts to feel like a sales rep, and it previewed the kind of friction that more formal ad products could generate. Reporting on these intrusive app nudges makes clear that even subtle commercial cues can feel jarring when they appear inside what users assumed was a neutral, subscription-backed service.
“The era of ads” and the fury of Pro subscribers
The backlash has been especially intense among people paying for premium access, who expected their monthly fee to buy an ad free experience. One widely shared complaint framed the moment bluntly as “the era of ads in ChatGPT,” with users “furious as even $200 a month Pro subscribers” were hit with promotional app suggestions. The anger was not only about the content of the recommendations but about the principle that a high tier subscription, marketed as a professional tool, would still be used as a channel for commercial experiments.
Comments from those Pro customers describe a sense of bait and switch, with some arguing that the company “knows” it can push more aggressive monetization because people have become dependent on the tool for work and study. Critics warned that the platform would “throw way more” resources into extracting value from users than into protecting them, calling this the “disgusting truth in distilled form.” The rhetoric may be heated, but it captures a real fear that once ad infrastructure is in place, the pressure to maximize revenue will only grow, regardless of how loudly $200 a month Pro subscribers protest.
OpenAI’s public denials and quiet clarifications
As user anger mounted, OpenAI found itself in an awkward communications bind, trying to reassure people that it was not secretly selling their conversations while still leaving the door open to future ad products. In one high profile controversy, executives issued an emergency clarification that they were not “testing” commercial ads in the way some critics alleged, insisting that the app suggestions were meant to be helpful rather than paid placements. The statement was carefully worded, focusing on the absence of direct sponsorship in the current tests rather than ruling out monetized recommendations down the line.
That nuance did little to calm skeptics, who pointed out that the company was already describing “sponsored content” internally and that the distinction between a paid recommendation and a “helpful” one could be hard to parse from the outside. The episode highlighted how fragile trust is when an AI system sits at the center of both personal and professional decision making, and how quickly that trust can be shaken by even the perception of undisclosed commercial influence. Coverage of this advertising controversy underscores that OpenAI is trying to walk a tightrope between monetization and credibility, with no guarantee it can keep its balance.
Why retailers see ChatGPT as the new front door
Part of what makes these ad plans so consequential is that ChatGPT is no longer just a curiosity, it is a major traffic driver for real world businesses. Retailers have already begun to see the chatbot as a kind of meta search engine, one that can funnel shoppers directly into their online storefronts. One study found that ChatGPT now accounts for 20 percent of referral traffic to Walmart, a staggering share for a tool that did not exist a few years ago, and that this share has been growing rapidly month over month.
That surge is especially striking given that Amazon has taken a different path, investing in its own AI shopping assistant called Rufus rather than opening itself up to external agents. Unlike Walmart, eBay, and Target, which have embraced third party AI referrals, Amazon is effectively “warding off” these agents to keep control of its customer funnel. The contrast shows why brands that do participate have so much riding on how ChatGPT ranks and recommends products, and why a shift toward paid placement could reshape competition. Reporting that ChatGPT is now 20% of Walmart’s referral traffic makes clear that whoever controls those recommendations effectively controls a new front door to online retail.
From referrals to full checkout inside the chat
The commercial stakes rise even further when you consider where this is heading: not just referrals, but full shopping journeys completed inside the chat window. Analysts tracking the space note that as platforms like ChatGPT start enabling checkout, the ramifications for brands could be huge, because the assistant will not just suggest where to shop, it will handle the transaction itself. In that world, the difference between being the first product mentioned and the second might be the difference between winning and losing the sale entirely.
For marketers, that makes the prospect of paying for preferential treatment almost irresistible, and for regulators it raises fresh antitrust and consumer protection questions. If an AI assistant that already drives 20 percent of a major retailer’s traffic begins to sell top placement in its answers, smaller competitors could find themselves effectively invisible. One analysis of this trend warned that as conversational agents become shopping agents, the power to shape demand will concentrate in a handful of platforms, with checkout inside ChatGPT turning ad budgets into direct control over what people buy.
How “sponsored answers” could work under the hood
Although OpenAI has not published a full spec, existing ad blockers and technical analyses offer a glimpse of how ChatGPT style advertising might function. One breakdown describes a system in which the model receives a list of eligible advertisers for a given query, along with bidding and targeting parameters, and then weaves those options into its natural language response. Instead of serving a separate banner or pre roll, the assistant might simply phrase its answer so that a sponsored brand appears as the most prominent or “confident” recommendation, with subtle labels or icons indicating that the placement is paid.
From a user’s perspective, that could mean that asking for a VPN, a password manager, or a budget airline surfaces one or two named services that have paid for the privilege, followed by a more generic explanation of what to look for. Ad blocking tools are already exploring ways to detect and filter these patterns, treating them as a new class of native advertising that lives inside generated text rather than on a static web page. One guide to how ChatGPT ads might work suggests that as these systems mature, users will need new defenses to preserve the distinction between genuine advice and paid persuasion.
What this means for everyday users
For ordinary people, the most immediate impact will be on trust. When you ask an AI to help choose a university, a mortgage, or a medical device, you are not just looking for a list of options, you are outsourcing part of your judgment. If that assistant starts to favor companies that have paid for visibility, even in subtle ways, it becomes harder to know whether you are getting the best answer or the best funded one. Over time, that uncertainty could push users back toward more manual research, or it could normalize a world in which every digital recommendation is assumed to be at least partly an ad.
There is also a risk that people with fewer resources will bear the brunt of any bias, because they are less likely to pay for ad free tiers or to have the time and tools to cross check AI suggestions. If sponsored placements become the default for free users while premium subscribers get cleaner answers, the information landscape could stratify along economic lines. That dynamic is already visible in traditional search and social feeds, but inside a conversational agent that feels like a trusted helper, the effect may be more insidious. When a chatbot that can send you directly to a retailer like Walmart also has a financial stake in which products you see, the line between assistance and manipulation becomes dangerously thin.
More from MorningOverview