I was a photographer and a Creative Director for 50 years.
I rarely glance at advertising these days.
Unfortunately for my retinas, I had to sit through 2 hours of commercial TV.
If y'all want to call that slop creative, I have no words.
At this point, if AI could make crap like I witnessed, what would be the point of worrying about it.
BTW, I would love to be a fly on the wall with a bunch of 20 somethings doing a pitch of that garbage... how they get approval is one of the great mysteries of the universe.
My optimistic side would like to believe in the “notion that truly creative companies will stand-out”, but in a capitalistic highly-resource-intensive-AI-world, monopolies tend to flourish. Google and Facebook reshaped the ad landscape the past decade, so I’d say systems (and people) simply seek effectiveness & efficiency.
You know the advertising crap-to-good-to-great ratio has always been pretty much a Pareto play — maybe 90-8-1ish. And you come right down to it, that’s what I hear you saying, as well: it stands to reason that would mirror back to the broad agency flavors ( you’ll recall when the split was “creative vs. service shops).
That’s not particularly new, but where I think your random blurt sheds real light is in the use of the word “system,”, because it ties into the industry’s pell mell to reconfigure around the tech offering. “Let us train our proprietary AI on your proprietary data and, damn, it’ll be a marriage set in cement,” goes the reasoning and when you think about the problems decoupling after the honey trap springs shut, I’m not sure they’re wrong.
TBD:
—the ability of our largest — relative minnows compared to MAANG — to compete on tech with tech.
—What the core value proposition of advertising in those circumstances will become.
—And, will those “system shops” really be “agencies” at all?
Addenda courtesy of Tennyson, In Memorium A.H.H.: "Our little systems have their day;/
Thus, a new advertising adjacent business? Although, in truth, we kinda sorta already do via media partners who are always adding AI bells and whistles to their mix. Where that hits a bit of a practical hiccup is when client-owned data (first party, performance, segmentation, all the goodies) is key to the training: not sure how delighted Brand A will be to hire Creative Shop B, knowing that full integration requires giving access to the family data jewels to AI-4-Rent provider C.
Considering the grief we already go through on data safety issues, would seem a whole ‘nother order of PIA.
Overall, I feel the article presents a perspective that undervalues the long-term impact of technological innovation and overestimates the enduring dominance of human creativity as the primary differentiator in the future.
Profit-driven industries always prioritize efficiency and cost reduction. If AI can generate ads, movies, music, or designs at a fraction of the cost while still driving consumer engagement, businesses will adopt it—regardless of human pushback.
Even if human creativity remains technically superior, the market doesn’t reward creativity for its own sake—it rewards what sells. If AI-generated content is “good enough” and significantly cheaper, businesses will naturally shift toward AI-driven solutions.
Furthermore, AI is still in its infancy. Dismissing its current output as "slop" is shortsighted—it’s the equivalent of judging a six-year-old’s artwork as representative of their future potential. As AI matures, its creative capabilities will only improve, further accelerating its adoption in commercial and creative industries.
Therefore, the real question isn’t “Will AI replace human creatives?” but rather, “How long will it take for businesses to phase them out?” A year, two, five, ten? And will there still be a place for human creativity? Of course! Since the dawn of time, we've placed value on human-made objects, and we always will.
Hi Rob, love and agree with the comparisons. 90% of the ideas out there were never good though. Never mind great. Maybe it is better that they are systematized. Maybe they’ll actually be ok then.
I certainly hope so.
I was a photographer and a Creative Director for 50 years.
I rarely glance at advertising these days.
Unfortunately for my retinas, I had to sit through 2 hours of commercial TV.
If y'all want to call that slop creative, I have no words.
At this point, if AI could make crap like I witnessed, what would be the point of worrying about it.
BTW, I would love to be a fly on the wall with a bunch of 20 somethings doing a pitch of that garbage... how they get approval is one of the great mysteries of the universe.
“Slop,” indeed.
My optimistic side would like to believe in the “notion that truly creative companies will stand-out”, but in a capitalistic highly-resource-intensive-AI-world, monopolies tend to flourish. Google and Facebook reshaped the ad landscape the past decade, so I’d say systems (and people) simply seek effectiveness & efficiency.
True. But the world always has room for a good idea.
Exactly! AI will be like electricity: a utility. What you do to stand out is where creative stardust is needed.
💛
You know the advertising crap-to-good-to-great ratio has always been pretty much a Pareto play — maybe 90-8-1ish. And you come right down to it, that’s what I hear you saying, as well: it stands to reason that would mirror back to the broad agency flavors ( you’ll recall when the split was “creative vs. service shops).
That’s not particularly new, but where I think your random blurt sheds real light is in the use of the word “system,”, because it ties into the industry’s pell mell to reconfigure around the tech offering. “Let us train our proprietary AI on your proprietary data and, damn, it’ll be a marriage set in cement,” goes the reasoning and when you think about the problems decoupling after the honey trap springs shut, I’m not sure they’re wrong.
TBD:
—the ability of our largest — relative minnows compared to MAANG — to compete on tech with tech.
—What the core value proposition of advertising in those circumstances will become.
—And, will those “system shops” really be “agencies” at all?
Addenda courtesy of Tennyson, In Memorium A.H.H.: "Our little systems have their day;/
They have their day and cease to be:..."
Creative agencies will be able to partner or “lease” the Systems me thinks.
Thus, a new advertising adjacent business? Although, in truth, we kinda sorta already do via media partners who are always adding AI bells and whistles to their mix. Where that hits a bit of a practical hiccup is when client-owned data (first party, performance, segmentation, all the goodies) is key to the training: not sure how delighted Brand A will be to hire Creative Shop B, knowing that full integration requires giving access to the family data jewels to AI-4-Rent provider C.
Considering the grief we already go through on data safety issues, would seem a whole ‘nother order of PIA.
Overall, I feel the article presents a perspective that undervalues the long-term impact of technological innovation and overestimates the enduring dominance of human creativity as the primary differentiator in the future.
Profit-driven industries always prioritize efficiency and cost reduction. If AI can generate ads, movies, music, or designs at a fraction of the cost while still driving consumer engagement, businesses will adopt it—regardless of human pushback.
Even if human creativity remains technically superior, the market doesn’t reward creativity for its own sake—it rewards what sells. If AI-generated content is “good enough” and significantly cheaper, businesses will naturally shift toward AI-driven solutions.
Furthermore, AI is still in its infancy. Dismissing its current output as "slop" is shortsighted—it’s the equivalent of judging a six-year-old’s artwork as representative of their future potential. As AI matures, its creative capabilities will only improve, further accelerating its adoption in commercial and creative industries.
Therefore, the real question isn’t “Will AI replace human creatives?” but rather, “How long will it take for businesses to phase them out?” A year, two, five, ten? And will there still be a place for human creativity? Of course! Since the dawn of time, we've placed value on human-made objects, and we always will.
Hi Rob, love and agree with the comparisons. 90% of the ideas out there were never good though. Never mind great. Maybe it is better that they are systematized. Maybe they’ll actually be ok then.