70+ Visual Content Statistics for 2026 (Verified)

Those two numbers describe the whole problem. Supply went vertical. Trust did not follow it.

Most visual content statistics roundups are still quoting a 3M corporate marketing paper from the mid-1990s that nobody can produce, a learning-styles claim that cognitive psychologists call a neuromyth, and a Buffer analysis of 100 Twitter accounts from 2014. This page used to quote some of them too.

So I went back to the filings, the survey PDFs and the court judgments, checked every figure against the document it came from, corrected the ones that had drifted, and put the ones that don’t hold up in their own section instead of quietly deleting them. Every statistic below carries its source and, where the publisher discloses one, its sample size and fielding date, so you can tell an SEC filing from a vendor survey before it goes in a deck.

Key Takeaways

• AI image supply is measured in tens of billions. Adobe’s Firefly counter went from 16 billion generations in December 2024 to 22 billion by April 2025, a six-billion jump in four months.
• Consumers want labels they cannot produce themselves. 76% of US adults say it’s important to know whether content is AI-made. 12% are confident they could tell.
• Visual content is a mid-tier B2B format, not a top one. 57% of B2B marketers used data visualizations or visual content, well behind short articles (92%) and video (76%).
• The stock imagery consolidation did not happen. Getty Images terminated its $3.7 billion merger with Shutterstock on July 7, 2026 after refusing a UK regulator’s condition. Both companies are still independent.
• Trust in AI splits by market, not by technology. 87% in China, 32% in the US, from the same survey instrument fielded the same fortnight.
• Seven of the most-quoted visual content stats have no traceable origin. That includes “65% of people are visual learners,” “94% more views,” and “the brain processes images 60,000 times faster than text.”

Top Visual Content Statistics for 2026

If you only take five numbers into a planning meeting, take these.

The Five Numbers Worth Quoting

1. Adobe’s Firefly models have been used to generate more than 22 billion assets globally, including images and video, as of April 2025 (Adobe MAX London press release, April 24, 2025; company-reported generations counter, not unique shipped assets).

2. 76% of US adults say it’s extremely or very important to be able to tell whether pictures, videos and text were made by AI or by people (Pew Research Center, published September 17, 2025; n=5,023 US adults, fielded June 9 to 15, 2025).

3. Only 12% of US adults feel confident they could tell the difference themselves. 53% say they’re not too confident or not at all confident (Pew Research Center, September 2025).

4. 57% of B2B marketers used data visualizations or visual content in the prior 12 months (Content Marketing Institute and MarketingProfs, B2B Content Marketing Outlook for 2025, October 2024; n=980 B2B marketers, fielded June 25 to August 16, 2024, sponsored by The MX Group).

5. 260 million people used Canva every month at the end of 2025, up from 220 million in December 2024 (Canva 2025 Year in Review; company-reported, private company, not audited to public-company standards).

Why These Five Hold Up

Each one comes from a different kind of evidence. One is a company generations counter, two are from a weighted probability panel, one is a sponsored practitioner survey, and one is a private company’s own year-end post.

That mix is the point. The Pew numbers are the most rigorous of the five and the Canva numbers are the least, and I’d rather you know which is which than have them all look the same in a bullet list.

Visual Content Marketing Statistics for B2B Teams

The cleanest baseline for “how much visual content do B2B teams actually make” comes from CMI and MarketingProfs. One caveat before the numbers: the 2026 edition of that survey dropped the format-share question entirely in favor of a self-reported “pacesetter” variable, so the figures below, published in October 2024, are still the most recent direct measurement of B2B format usage. The October 2025 edition does not replace them.

Which Content Formats B2B Marketers Use

6. 92% of B2B marketers used short articles or posts in the prior 12 months (CMI and MarketingProfs 2025, n=980).

7. 76% used videos, making video content the second most widely produced format.

8. 75% used case studies or customer stories.

9. 69% used long articles or posts.

10. 57% used data visualizations or visual content, putting visual work fifth of six tracked formats.

11. 51% used e-books or white papers.

Visual content sits in the middle of that list, not at the top of it. Any roundup telling you it’s the dominant B2B format is arguing with the only recent survey that asked, and that survey puts four other content types above it.

What the list doesn’t tell you is how visuals get used inside the other formats. A case study with six charts in it counts as a case study, not as visual content, so the 57% understates how much of a team’s content creation work is actually visual production.

Which Formats Marketers Say Actually Pay Back

12. 58% of B2B marketers rated videos their most effective format, with case studies second at 53% and e-books or white papers third at 45%. Case studies led the year before, and video came second (CMI and MarketingProfs 2025).

13. 48.6% of marketers named short-form video their highest-ROI content format, a lead that holds across B2C, B2B and non-profit segments (HubSpot State of Marketing 2026, n=1,500+ global marketers; vendor survey, self-reported ROI).

14. 16.5% named case studies their highest-ROI format.

15. 9.8% named interactive content (HubSpot 2026).

16. 0.2% named podcasts or audio content.

17. 22% of marketers said expanding from text-based to visual or audio content was the most effective diversification strategy for their brand in 2025 (HubSpot marketing statistics, citing State of Marketing 2026).

HubSpot sells the software these teams run their content through, so I read the ROI ranking as directional rather than measured. The 0.2% for podcasts is the tell: that isn’t a performance finding, it’s a sampling artifact of who answers HubSpot’s surveys. I cover the rest of that data in more depth in the content marketing statistics roundup.

How Much of a Marketing Team’s Content Is Visual

Venngage runs the only recurring survey that asks marketers to quantify how much they use visual content in their own marketing strategies. It’s also the most conflicted source on this page, because Venngage sells infographic software to the exact people it surveys. Its published sample is small and the fielding year has not moved since 2023.

18. 21.9% of marketers reported that more than 75% of their content was visual (Venngage visual content marketing statistics, n=105, 2023 fielding).

19. 34.3% reported that 20% to 50% of their content included visuals.

20. 52.22% said charts and data visualizations were the visual format they used most frequently.

21. 34.29% rated stock photos their top-performing visual content (Venngage).

22. 39.05% reported that stock photos performed poorly for them.

23. More than 60% of surveyed marketers said they had revamped their visual content strategy (Venngage).

Numbers 21 and 22 are the interesting pair, because they’re the same format in the same survey landing in opposite buckets for different teams. Stock photography isn’t good or bad on its own. It performs when the picture carries information and fails when it’s decoration, which is exactly what Nielsen Norman Group’s eye-tracking work found fifteen years ago.

AI Image Generation Statistics

How Fast AI Image Generation Scaled

24. Firefly-powered generations across Adobe’s tools surpassed 16 billion cumulative generations as of the Q4 FY2024 earnings call (Adobe Q4 FY2024 earnings call script, December 11, 2024).

25. Firefly passed 18 billion assets generated globally by February 12, 2025 (Adobe newsroom).

26. Firefly passed 22 billion by April 24, 2025 (Adobe newsroom), a six-billion increase in a little over four months.

27. Firefly is no longer a single-model product. As of MAX 2025 it ran partner models from ElevenLabs, Google, Luma AI, OpenAI, Runway and Topaz Labs (Adobe MAX 2025, October 28, 2025). Two more arrived that December: FLUX.2 from Black Forest Labs and Google’s Nano Banana Pro (Adobe blog, December 16, 2025).

That last one has a practical consequence most teams miss. “Made in Firefly” no longer means “made with Adobe’s commercially-safe training data.” If your legal review depends on Firefly’s IP indemnity, somebody has to check which model produced each asset. I go through how that changes the workflow in the Adobe Firefly review.

One number I will not give you: how many of those generations came from marketing teams. Adobe doesn’t break that out, and neither does anyone else.

The Platforms Behind the Output

28. More than 220 million people used Canva in December 2024, up from 200 million in October 2024 (Canva 2024 Year in Review).

29. Canva reached $3.5 billion in revenue in 2025 (Canva 2025 Year in Review; company-reported, unaudited).

30. 100 million teachers, students and education leaders used Canva monthly as of the 2025 wrap (Canva).

31. Figma’s research and development expenses increased by $586.3 million, or 356%, for the year ended December 31, 2024 (Figma Form S-1, filed July 1, 2025).

32. That S-1 uses the term “AI” roughly 190 times across the filing, and Figma’s AI features run on third-party foundation models rather than its own.

33. Adobe guided FY2025 total revenue to $23.30 billion to $23.55 billion (Adobe Q4 and FY24 earnings release, December 11, 2024).

Adobe does not disclose Adobe Stock as its own revenue line, and it has never published a Creative Cloud subscriber count in its 10-K. Any article giving you a precise figure for either is quoting an aggregator, not Adobe. The same goes for the Firefly market-share and revenue figures circulating in SEO content, none of which appear in an Adobe filing.

How Many Marketers Use AI to Make Visuals

34. 60% of surveyed marketers use AI for content ideation, the most common use case (Venngage design and marketing trends; sample size not disclosed).

35. 55% use AI for generating visuals such as charts, infographics and templates, which is the closest thing this survey has to a measure of creating visual content with a model rather than a designer.

36. 48% reported that AI-generated content exceeded their expectations in 2025 marketing.

37. About 26% reported not using AI at all.

38. 53% of B2B marketers use creative asset tools for generating and editing images, video and visual materials (CMI and MarketingProfs, B2B Content and Marketing Trends: Insights for 2026, October 2025; n=1,015 B2B respondents of 1,229 global, fielded June 24 to August 14, 2025, sponsored by Storyblok).

39. 74% of surveyed professionals say AI is critically or very important to their organization (SmarterX 2026 State of AI for Business Report, n=2,100+; the sixth annual edition of what used to be the Marketing AI Institute’s State of Marketing AI Report).

40. 38% cite lack of training and education as the top barrier to AI adoption, down from 62% in the 2025 edition.

Number 38 is the closest thing the 2026 CMI survey has to a visual-content measurement, and it isn’t the same question as number 10. One counts teams using AI tools to make images. The other counts teams publishing visual content at all. Roundups that swap one for the other are inventing a trend line.

Stock Photo and Visual Licensing Statistics

What the Licensing Business Earns Now

41. Shutterstock’s FY2025 revenue was $989.9 million, up from $935.3 million, an increase of about 6% (Shutterstock FY2025 results, February 17, 2026; audited US GAAP reporting).

42. The legacy Content product, which is stock licensing, brought in $786.7 million, up 4%, and represented 79% of total revenue.

43. Data, Distribution and Services, which includes AI training-data licensing, brought in $203.3 million, up 16%, and represented 21% of total revenue.

The gap between 4% and 16% is the whole story of the stock imagery business right now. The part that sells pictures to marketers is growing at about the rate of inflation. The part that sells pictures to model builders is growing four times faster.

The Merger That Fell Apart

44. Getty Images and Shutterstock announced a merger of equals on January 7, 2025, at a combined enterprise value of approximately $3.7 billion (Shutterstock 8-K exhibit).

45. The companies projected $150 million to $200 million in annual cost synergies by year three.

46. The Hart-Scott-Rodino waiting period expired without conditions on February 23, 2026 (Shutterstock investor release).

47. Getty Images delivered written notice terminating the merger agreement on July 7, 2026, after its board declined the UK Competition and Markets Authority’s condition that Shutterstock divest its entire editorial business (Getty Images Form 8-K, filed July 7, 2026).

Getty Images Holdings and Shutterstock are two separate public companies as of August 2026. If you’re reading a 2026 article that describes the combined company as a done deal, it was written before July and never revisited. The $150 million in synergies was always a projection. Now it’s a projection for a company that doesn’t exist.

How Visual Content Performs on the Page

This is the section where the recycled statistics live, so I want to be precise about what the real research says and how old it is.

What Reading and Eye-Tracking Studies Found

48. Web users have time to read at most 28% of the words on an average page visit, and 20% is more likely (Nielsen Norman Group, Jakob Nielsen, May 2008).

49. Color can improve brand recognition by up to 80% (Xerox color marketing one-pager; vendor document, no methodology disclosed).

Nielsen Norman Group’s eye-tracking work on photos as web content (2010) found something more useful than a percentage. Users completely ignore one category of image, the feel-good decorative kind, and scrutinize another, product photos and pictures of real people. That’s the finding worth designing around, and it’s the reason Venngage’s split verdict on stock photos in numbers 21 and 22 makes sense.

Both of those studies are old. I’m keeping them because nobody has replaced them with better instrumentation, and because a 2008 study honestly dated beats a 2026 blog post with no study behind it.

How Many Publishers Actually Add Images

50. 88% of bloggers add images or pictures to their posts (Orbit Media blogger survey, n=808 content marketers, fielded August 2025).

51. 4% incorporate seven or more visuals per post.

52. 50% of that heavy-visual group report strong results, the highest rate in Orbit Media’s survey.

53. The average webinar attendee watches 53 minutes of webinar content (ClickMeeting State of Webinars; reflects 2019 data, up from 52 minutes the prior year, and ClickMeeting has not republished a comparable figure since).

An earlier version of this page reported Orbit Media’s figure as 90% of bloggers adding visuals, with 3% adding ten or more images and being 39% more likely to report strong results. Two of those three numbers were wrong. The 2019 edition of Orbit Media’s survey said the heavy-image group was 2.5 times more likely to report strong results, not 39% more likely. The 39% came from a different stat on the same page about original research. Orbit Media has since moved to a seven-image threshold, which is why the current numbers above look different rather than merely updated.

What Consumers Think About AI-Generated Visuals

Labeling and Detection

The 64-point gap between numbers 2 and 3 is the single most actionable finding on this page. People want disclosure and they know they can’t do detection themselves, which puts the burden on the publisher rather than the audience.

54. Half of US adults say the increased use of AI in daily life makes them feel more concerned than excited, up from 37% in 2021 (Pew Research Center, March 2026, reporting a June 2025 survey).

55. 21% of US workers say at least some of their work is done with AI, up from 16% in 2024 (Pew Research Center, September 2025 survey).

56. 65% of American workers still say they don’t use AI much or at all in their job (Pew, same survey).

Pew’s detection figure is self-rated, not tested against actual images. Nobody showed these respondents a set of pictures and scored them. The real gap could run wider in either direction, and I’d treat 12% as a confidence measure rather than an accuracy measure.

Trust in AI by Market

57. 87% in China say they trust AI (Edelman Trust Barometer 2025 Flash Poll, n=5,000 across five markets, fielded October 17 to 27, 2025).

58. 67% in Brazil.

59. 39% in Germany (Edelman 2025 Flash Poll).

60. 36% in the UK.

61. 32% in the United States, the lowest of the five markets Edelman surveyed.

62. In the US, 49% reject AI’s growing use against 17% who embrace it, close to three to one. In China the ratio inverts, with 54% embracing and 10% rejecting.

Edelman is a PR firm that advises corporations on AI communications, so it has a stake in this conversation being taken seriously. I’d still use these numbers, because the five-market spread was collected with one instrument in one fortnight, and that internal consistency is what makes the comparison worth anything. Just don’t quote a global average from a five-country poll.

How Much AI Content People Say They See

63. 56% of social media users report seeing AI slop on social media often or very often (Sprout Social Q1 2026 Pulse Survey, n=2,250 across the US, UK and Australia, fielded February 5 to 9, 2026).

64. 83% see it at least sometimes (Sprout Social Q1 2026).

65. Weekly use of generative AI nearly doubled across six markets, from 18% in 2024 to 34% in 2025 (Reuters Institute, Generative AI and News Report 2025, YouGov, roughly 2,000 per market in Argentina, Denmark, France, Japan, the UK and the US, fielded June 5 to July 15, 2025).

66. ChatGPT reached 22% weekly use across those six markets, and 47% among 18 to 24-year-olds. Information-seeking overtook media creation as the primary use case, more than doubling to 24% weekly.

67. 58% of respondents worldwide say they worry about telling real from fake online when it comes to news, rising to 73% in both the US and Africa and falling to 54% in Europe (Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2025, 48 countries, roughly 100,000 respondents).

Number 63 is the one I’d watch. “AI slop” is now a phrase a survey can put in front of consumers and get a coherent answer to, which means it has become a category people recognize on sight. That’s a reputational risk for any brand publishing generated imagery without saying so.

Provenance and the Legal Layer for AI Visuals

Content Credentials Adoption

68. The Content Authenticity Initiative passed 5,000 members in August 2025, eight months after hitting the previous milestone (Content Authenticity Initiative).

69. More than 6,000 members and affiliates have live applications of Content Credentials as of the Content Credentials 2.3 release (C2PA).

70. Cloudflare became the first major content delivery network to implement Content Credentials, and roughly 20% of the web uses Cloudflare’s services (Content Authenticity Initiative, February 2025).

Read those two numbers carefully, because they count different things. The 5,000 is a membership roll. The 6,000 covers members and affiliates that C2PA says have live applications, and C2PA does not define what qualifies as live. Neither is a coverage figure. The number I’d actually want is the count of C2PA-signed assets in circulation, and no one publishes it in aggregate.

What the Getty v. Stability Rulings Actually Decided

71. In Getty Images (US) Inc & Ors v. Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch), handed down November 4, 2025, Getty abandoned its primary copyright and database-rights claims during trial. The secondary copyright claim failed because the court held that AI model weights are not an infringing copy. Getty won a limited trade-mark finding under sections 10(1) and 10(2) of the Trade Marks Act, and lost on section 10(3) (full judgment PDF).

72. Stability admitted for the purposes of those proceedings that there are approximately 12.3 million visual assets in LAION-2B-en, the training subset at issue. That’s the size of the subset, not a count of Getty images inside it, and roundups that report it as the latter are overstating the record.

73. In the US case, Getty Images (US), Inc. v. Stability AI, Ltd., No. 3:25-cv-06891 (N.D. Cal.), Judge Trina L. Thompson granted in part and denied in part Stability’s motion to dismiss on April 23, 2026. The case is in discovery, with a dispositive-motion hearing set for August 2027 and a jury trial scheduled for January 18 to February 9, 2028 (CourtListener docket).

The UK court did not decide whether training a model on copyrighted images is itself infringement. Getty dropped that claim because it couldn’t establish the training happened in the UK. Anyone selling you certainty on this is reading headlines rather than the judgment.

For a marketing team, the practical posture hasn’t changed: keep a human in the review loop, document which model produced each asset, and record Content Credentials where the tooling supports it.

Visual Content Statistics That Do Not Survive a Source Check

An earlier version of this page carried some of these. Rather than delete them and leave everyone who has cited them wondering what happened, here is each claim, where it actually came from, and what the record shows.

“65% of people are visual learners.” The most traceable origin is William C. Bradford’s Reaching the Visual Learner, posted to SSRN in 2004 and revised in 2011. The paper does state the figure. It attaches no study to it. The underlying learning-styles framework is characterized as a neuromyth in the peer-reviewed literature, including Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer and Bjork (2008) and Coffield, Moseley, Hall and Ecclestone (2004).

“People remember 65% of visual information after three days, versus 10% of written.” This one is real but narrower than usually reported. John Medina’s Brain Rules says: hear a piece of information and three days later you’ll remember 10% of it, add a picture and you’ll remember 65%. That’s hearing versus hearing-plus-picture, not visual versus written. Cite it that way and it’s a fine finding.

“Visual content gets 94% more views.” No locatable origin. It’s attributed to Skyword or MDG Advertising depending on who repeats it, and neither hosts the original report at any URL still serving.

“People remember 80% of what they see and 20% of what they read.” Misattributed to Edgar Dale’s Cone of Experience, which carried no percentages. Formally disputed in Subramony, Molenda, Betrus and Thalheimer (2014), “The Mythical Retention Chart and the Corruption of Dale’s Cone of Experience.”

“The brain processes images 60,000 times faster than text” and “90% of information transmitted to the brain is visual.” Both trace to a 1996 or 1997 3M corporate marketing paper that nobody has produced. No peer-reviewed source exists for either.

“Tweets with images get 150% more retweets.” Buffer, 2014, based on 100 customer accounts, published before the X rebrand and several algorithm generations ago.

“Facebook posts with images get 2.3 times more engagement.” BuzzSumo, 2017, before the News Feed overhaul and the rise of Reels.

“LinkedIn posts with images get 98% more comments.” LinkedIn’s own marketing blog, 2014, never refreshed.

“80% of people switch between online search and video while buying.” Think with Google published this, and this page cited it for years. Google has since folded Think with Google into Google Business, and the URL now redirects through three hops to a content hub with no article behind it. No current Google page restates the figure, so it stands here as a claim Google made rather than a number that can still be verified.

Firefly market-share and revenue figures. “29% market share among AI design tools,” “70% weekly engagement,” “45% of Creative Cloud subscribers used Firefly,” “$400 million in Firefly direct revenue.” None appear in an Adobe filing or press release. They appear in third-party SEO content citing each other.

A primary source for any of these would be worth seeing. The generation counter and the earnings figures remain the only Adobe numbers on this page that trace to an Adobe document.

Frequently Asked Questions

What Are the Most Important Visual Content Statistics for 2026?

The five in the top section: Adobe Firefly’s 22 billion generated assets, Pew’s 76% wanting AI labels against 12% who think they could detect them, CMI’s 57% of B2B marketers using data visualizations, and Canva’s 260 million monthly users. Those cover supply, audience expectation, professional adoption and platform scale, and each one comes from a document you can open.

How Effective Is Visual Content in Marketing?

Honestly, the strongest recent evidence is about video rather than static visuals. 58% of B2B marketers rate video their most effective format (CMI, n=980) and 48.6% of marketers name short-form video their highest-ROI format (HubSpot, n=1,500+). For static imagery, the best available signal is Orbit Media’s finding that the 4% of bloggers using seven or more visuals per post report strong results at 50%, the highest rate in that survey. That’s correlation from a self-reported survey, not a controlled test, and I’d hold it loosely.

What Types of Visual Content Do Marketers Use Most?

Among B2B marketers, 57% used data visualizations or visual content in the prior 12 months, behind short articles (92%), video (76%), case studies (75%) and long articles (69%). Among marketers who quantified their own visual mix, 52.22% said charts and data visualizations were what they produced most often.

Is “65% of People Are Visual Learners” True?

No, and it hasn’t been for a long time. The figure traces to a 2004 SSRN paper that asserts it without citing data, and the learning-styles framework behind it is treated as a neuromyth in cognitive psychology. If you need a defensible version of the underlying idea, use the picture-superiority effect from Paivio and Standing’s actual recall studies, or Medina’s hearing-plus-picture finding stated as he stated it.

How Many Marketers Use AI to Create Visuals?

55% of surveyed marketers use AI for generating visuals such as charts, infographics and templates (Venngage, sample size not disclosed), and 53% of B2B marketers use creative asset tools for generating and editing images and video (CMI, n=1,015). Those two questions aren’t identical and the samples aren’t comparable, so treat the pair as a range rather than a trend.

Do Consumers Want AI-Generated Images Labeled?

76% of US adults say it’s extremely or very important to be able to tell whether pictures, videos and text were made by AI or by people, while 12% feel confident they could tell on their own (Pew, n=5,023, fielded June 2025). Separately, 56% of social users say they see AI slop often or very often (Sprout Social, n=2,250). Disclosure is cheaper than being caught.

How Do I Tell a Trustworthy Visual Content Statistic From a Recycled One?

Trace it to a document with three things attached: an organization, a publication date, and a sample size or methodology. If any of the three is missing, it’s folklore. After that, ask who paid for it. Vendor surveys from HubSpot, Sprout Social, Venngage and Edelman all point in the direction of their own product, which doesn’t make them useless but does make them worth cross-checking. SEC filings, court judgments and probability-panel surveys hold up better than anything else on this list.

Sources and Methodology

Every figure on this page was checked against its source document before publication. Figures appearing in a report were checked against the report; figures appearing in a filing were checked against the filing.

Claims were excluded when they could not be traced to an origin document, when they rest on a framework the peer-reviewed literature rejects, or when the only surviving citation is another blog post. Excluded claims appear in their own section above with their attribution intact, rather than being deleted, because several of them have been cited elsewhere for years and a reader arriving from one of those citations deserves to find out what happened to the number.

Vendor-sponsored research is labeled as such at the point of use. Company-reported metrics such as generation counters and private-company user counts are labeled as company-reported and are not audited to public-company standards.

Statistics audit date: August 25, 2026.

• Adobe, Q4 FY2024 earnings call script, December 11, 2024: https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/cc/en/investor-relations/pdfs/11214202/c75e6yhrste.pdf
• Adobe, Q4 and FY24 earnings release, December 11, 2024: https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/cc/in/about-adobe/newsroom/pdfs/2025/Adobe%20-%20Q4%20and%20FY24%20Earnings.pdf
• Adobe Firefly newsroom, February 12, 2025: https://news.adobe.com/news/2025/02/firefly-web-app-commercially-safe
• Adobe MAX London, April 24, 2025: https://news.adobe.com/news/2025/04/adobe-revolutionizes-ai-assisted-creativity-firefly
• Adobe MAX 2025, October 28, 2025: https://news.adobe.com/news/2025/10/adobe-max-2025-firefly
• Adobe blog, partner models in Firefly, December 16, 2025: https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2025/12/16/adobe-firefly-improves-ai-video-creation-tools-new-models-unlimited-generations
• Canva 2024 Year in Review: https://www.canva.com/newsroom/news/canva-2024-wrap/
• Canva 2025 Year in Review: https://www.canva.com/newsroom/news/canva-2025-wrap/
• Figma, Form S-1, filed July 1, 2025: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579878/000162828025033742/figma-sx1.htm
• CMI and MarketingProfs, B2B Content Marketing Outlook for 2025, October 2024: https://contentmarketinginstitute.com/b2b-research/b2b-content-marketing-trends-research-2025
• CMI and MarketingProfs, B2B Content and Marketing Trends: Insights for 2026, October 2025: https://contentmarketinginstitute.com/b2b-research/b2b-content-marketing-trends-research
• HubSpot, State of Marketing 2026: https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/hubspot-blog-marketing-industry-trends-report
• HubSpot marketing statistics: https://www.hubspot.com/marketing-statistics
• Venngage, visual content marketing statistics: https://venngage.com/blog/visual-content-marketing-statistics/
• Venngage, design and marketing trends report: https://venngage.com/blog/design-marketing-trends-report/
• SmarterX, 2026 State of AI for Business Report: https://smarterx.ai/reports/2026-state-of-ai-for-business
• Shutterstock, FY2025 results, February 17, 2026: https://investor.shutterstock.com/news-releases/news-release-details/shutterstock-reports-full-year-2025-and-fourth-quarter-financial
• Shutterstock, 8-K merger exhibit, January 7, 2025: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001549346/000114036125000468/ny20041185x1_ex99-1.htm
• Shutterstock, antitrust clearance, February 23, 2026: https://investor.shutterstock.com/news-releases/news-release-details/getty-images-and-shutterstock-receive-unconditional-antitrust
• Getty Images, Form 8-K on merger termination, July 7, 2026: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1898496/000121390026075721/ea029721801-8k_getty.htm
• Pew Research Center, How Americans View AI and Its Impact on People and Society, September 17, 2025: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2025/09/17/how-americans-view-ai-and-its-impact-on-people-and-society/
• Pew Research Center, key findings on American views of AI, March 12, 2026: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/03/12/key-findings-about-how-americans-view-artificial-intelligence/
• Edelman Trust Barometer 2025 Flash Poll on AI, November 2025: https://www.edelman.com/trust/2025/trust-barometer/flash-poll-trust-artifical-intelligence
• Sprout Social, Q1 2026 Pulse Survey analysis: https://media.sproutsocial.com/uploads/2026/03/Sprout-Social-Q1-2026-Pulse-Survey-Analysis.pdf
• Reuters Institute, Generative AI and News Report 2025, October 2025: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2025-10/Gen_AI_and_News_Report_2025.pdf
• Reuters Institute, Digital News Report 2025 executive summary: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2025/dnr-executive-summary
• Content Authenticity Initiative, 5,000 members, August 2025: https://contentauthenticity.org/blog/5000-members-building-momentum-for-a-more-trustworthy-digital-world
• Content Authenticity Initiative, Cloudflare implementation, February 2025: https://contentauthenticity.org/blog/cloudflare-becomes-the-first-major-content-delivery-network-to-implement-content-credentials
• C2PA, Content Credentials 2.3 launch: https://c2pa.org/the-c2pa-launches-content-credentials-2-3-and-celebrates-5-years-of-impact-across-the-digital-ecosystem/
• Getty Images (US) Inc & Ors v. Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch), November 4, 2025: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Getty-Images-v-Stability-AI.pdf
• Getty Images (US), Inc. v. Stability AI, Ltd., No. 3:25-cv-06891 (N.D. Cal.) docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71112094/getty-images-us-inc-v-stability-ai-ltd/
• Nielsen Norman Group, How Little Do Users Read?, May 2008: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-little-do-users-read/
• Nielsen Norman Group, Photos as Web Content, November 2010: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/photos-as-web-content/
• Orbit Media, blogger survey, August 2025: https://www.orbitmedia.com/blog/blogging-statistics/
• Xerox, color marketing one-pager: https://www.office.xerox.com/latest/COLFS-02UA.PDF
• ClickMeeting, State of Webinars: https://blog.clickmeeting.com/webinar-report
• William C. Bradford, Reaching the Visual Learner, SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=587201
• John Medina, Brain Rules, vision chapter: https://brainrules.net/article/vision/
• Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer and Bjork (2008), Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence, Psychological Science in the Public Interest 9(3):105-119
• Subramony, Molenda, Betrus and Thalheimer (2014), The Mythical Retention Chart and the Corruption of Dale’s Cone of Experience, Educational Technology 54(6):6-16

Related reading on this site: video marketing statistics, content marketing statistics, digital marketing statistics, and reviews of Canva and Visme.