​Your AI Has Two Answers, It Gave The Customer The Wrong One

Sagi Eliyahu is CEO of KMS Lighthouse. Leading the company’s vision to disrupt the knowledge management market.

For most of my career, I’ve watched companies run on knowledge that disagrees with itself. The refund policy in the help center says 30 days, the agent script says 45 for loyalty members and the PDF a team lead circulated last spring says 30 unless the item was on sale. No one planned it that way. It built up one update at a time, usually for good reasons.

For years this mostly worked, not because the knowledge was good but because people are good at compensating for bad knowledge. An experienced agent knows which document is stale, knows to ask the person at the next desk and knows that when the system says one thing and the floor says another, the floor usually wins. That informal correction layer has quietly held customer service together for decades.

AI doesn’t have that layer. When you point a model at your content and ask it to answer customers, it has no way of knowing which version is the real one, so it picks one, phrases it confidently and moves on. When it picks wrong, the customer hears the mistake in the same calm, confident tone as a right answer.

The Problem Was Always There, AI Made It Public

The most cited example is still Air Canada. In 2024, a Canadian tribunal held the airline responsible after its website chatbot told a grieving passenger he could apply for a bereavement fare refund after his trip, even though the airline’s own policy page said otherwise. Air Canada argued that the correct information was available elsewhere on its site. The tribunal didn’t accept that, since the chatbot was part of the website and the website belonged to the company.

I see that case less as an AI failure and more as a knowledge management failure. The bot didn’t invent a policy out of nowhere. Somewhere in what the company had published, two versions of the truth lived side by side. A human agent might have caught it, but the machine had no reason to.