Is AI treating you (and your brand) well?
3 minute read…
Whether or not to use AI to create for a brand is not a technology question, but a sameness question. If you’re comfortable using AI for easy, agreeable creative output, you’ll be in the same boat as the others who use it that way. Drowning from lack of brand difference.
I don’t think, therefore I know
Hallucinating Large Language Models (LLMs) spit answers with absolute authority. Ask a question on ChatGPT or Gemini, and it’ll feel assertive… almost overly nice. Not saying "Erm, I think" or “You know what mate, I’m just not sure of that.” Clearly, its behaviour is beyond-human. It’s been trained that way.
AI models are often trained using Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), which rewards them for being helpful and agreeable. This can lead to a behavior called sycophancy, where the AI prioritises agreeing with you (or its own previous wrong statement) over being accurate. The economics of affirmation are a tricky business, as Mouthwash studio points out in an interview with brand strategist and cultural forecaster, Barr Balamuth.
“Relentless affirmation, premise validation, and constant praise are engagement drivers designed with the same logic as Instagram’s pull-to-refresh function mimicking a slot machine lever.”
Creativity needs friction not niceties
OTT affirmations from LLMs might provide instant gratification, like you’re doing a good job. But real creativity doesn’t work like that. Anyone that’s ever worked with a Creative Director knows that conflict pushes work, not immediate compliance. Being nice when brand building won’t always suffice: kind answers don’t pass muster
Embracing ambiguity and friction - working out the answer for yourself - is a necessary component of strong creativity. They create a more meaningful understanding of why and how an idea works. Getting an answer generated for you makes the creative muscle weak, the outcome bland.
“Friction pushes us beyond what we know, and discomfort often sparks innovation.” Ben Payne, Vice President of Design at Lotus Group.
No-brainer or same-samer?
The promise of innovation without the graft seems like a no-brainer from a business sense. Optimise processes. Streamline workflows. Produce content faster, cheaper with fewer resources. Less tricky human beings to deal with, or get in the way of the growth.
This type of thinking has a catastrophic impact on brands and the creative teams who craft them. Handing the creation of a brand’s look and feel - its soul - over to artificial generation is not an immaculate conception. It is the kiss of creative death.
It’s never been easier for anyone to create something that looks and sounds exactly like something else. But a brand isn’t something, it is it. A one in more than a million. To stand a chance at standing out, what it looks like and how it sounds has to feel like the only one. Not the same.
Bottom of the slop bucket
AI’s rinse-and-repeat-eye-wateringly quick creative can turn brands into vessels of their own demise. This is easiest to see in the luxury, premium space, the last place you want to look and feel cheap and anyone’s. Signalling a mass market vibe decreases the distance luxury brands invest so heavily in trying to increase.
Brands that tell more human stories, and accept the nature of humans - whether that’s touch, time, craft or even imperfections - are able to be the anti-dote to the algo. To breathe with human sensibilities: to brand with authentic intent.
Tool intentionally
AI is a tool. Whether it is good or bad for your brand is based on intentional use of the tool. You could use a screwdriver to do open heart surgery, but you’d need a lot of blue roll…
If you use AI tools to help create distinct elements of a visual identity system, or train a model to run messaging tests using your own original tone of voice, that could be a good use of the tool.
If AI is used to only save time, lower costs, fill content gaps, then it’s worth assessing if the tool is actually doing more damage to your brand than good.
