AI Didn’t Ruin Creativity. A Lack of Creativity Did.

Let’s start there.

Because long before ChatGPT started writing headlines or Midjourney started conjuring ad visuals out of digital ether, we had a problem in our industry. It wasn’t a technology problem. It wasn’t even a talent problem. It was a standards problem. A taste problem. A rigor problem.

You’ve seen the numbers. According to WARC and Kantar, more than half of all advertising is not remembered or even noticed by consumers. Kantar’s database (which evaluates over 230,000 ads) shows that the majority of ads score as "forgettable." And let’s not even start on the yawning gap between marketers and consumers when it comes to what’s perceived as “good.”

That wasn’t AI. That was us.

The False Narrative: “AI Kills Creativity”

Let’s talk about the narrative that’s taken hold: that generative AI is some sort of existential threat to creative expression.

This fear is not baseless, but it is misplaced.

What AI threatens is lazy creative. Redundant creative. Derivative, templated, safe creative. And if we’re honest, much of what has flooded the ecosystem in the past decade has been exactly that.

AI is not undermining creative excellence; it’s challenging the creative process to up its game. And frankly, that challenge is long overdue.

When used thoughtfully, AI isn’t a replacement for creativity; it’s a mirror. It reflects what we put into it. It learns from the materials with which we train it. And it exposes, sometimes brutally, the commoditization of what we once considered a sacred craft.

Creativity is Not a Commodity

One of the biggest risks in this moment is confusing output for originality.

Just because AI can generate 100 tagline options in 15 seconds does not mean any of them are meaningful. And yet, some marketers are treating that volume as value.

But what truly elevates creative work isn’t the quantity of possibilities; it’s the judgment to choose the one that will spark an emotional response, shift perception, or drive behavior.

AI doesn’t possess judgment. Or instinct. Or cultural context. You do. The human brain – fed by intuition, experience, empathy, and yes, data – is still the greatest creative engine we’ve ever known. AI is a tool. An accelerant. Not an oracle.

The problem isn’t that AI is creating “bad ads.” The problem is that we’ve allowed mediocre inputs to define the standard of what passes as acceptable. When the briefing is shallow, when the insight is absent, when the brand strategy is incoherent… AI simply magnifies those flaws.

Let me put it plainly: bad creative is not the fault of the machine. It’s the fault of the marketer who didn’t demand more.

A New Golden Age If We Choose It

There’s a bright side to all this, and it’s one I wish we’d talk about more: we may be standing on the brink of a creative renaissance… if we’re willing to lead it.

We now have access to tools that can visualize the impossible, prototype in seconds, and explore creative directions once constrained by budget or time. Used properly, these tools can unlock more creativity, not less.

Think of what this means for brands with smaller teams, tighter timelines, or fewer resources. Think of what it means for concept testing, for early-stage ideation, for democratizing creative development across diverse perspectives.

But again, the caveat: AI will only expand what we allow it to learn. Garbage in, garbage out. Brilliant strategy in, brilliant stimulus out. And so our mandate, as marketers and brand stewards, is not to resist this new set of tools, but to curate the inputs and elevate the vision.

Reinstating Creative Standards

If there’s a villain in the room, it’s not technology: it’s complacency. The soft decline in what we’re willing to accept as “creative work.”

We’ve built workflows that optimize for speed over story, for performance over persuasion, and for impressions over impact. The age of "good enough" has become, well, good enough.

To embrace AI in a way that protects and even elevates creativity, we need to return to some fundamental truths:

• Creative still wins.
  As Peter Field and James Hurman have repeatedly shown in their “The Effectiveness Code”, the most creatively awarded campaigns are significantly more effective at driving long-term business results.
• Ideas still matter.
  The big idea is not dead. It just got buried under dashboards, sprints, and ad units. Unearth it.
• Briefs still matter.
  A bad brief is not made better by generative AI. If your brief doesn’t tell the story, neither will the output – whether human or machine. ANA members confirm that briefing is still one of the most broken parts of the process.

So What Should We Do?

Here’s how marketers can use AI without ruining creative:

1. Train the tool – don’t let the tool train you.
   Use your best creative, best briefs, and best brand truths to shape what AI sees.
2. Define what “good” looks like.
   Develop a clear, internal standard for creative excellence and teach your teams to judge against it.
3. Put humans in the loop.
   Let AI generate, but let humans refine, select, and inspire.
4. Invest in creative leadership.
   We need more CMOs and brand leaders who protect the sanctity of creative craft. The AI era requires stronger human judgment, not less.
5. Champion original thinking.
   If everyone is using the same tools trained on the same inputs, differentiation becomes a human responsibility. Stand for originality.

AI Is Not the End. It’s the Test.

Artificial intelligence is not the death of creativity. It’s the biggest test creativity has faced in a generation.

If all we do is automate mediocrity, then yes: creativity as we know it could be diminished. But if we use AI to amplify brilliance, challenge assumptions, and augment our humanity? We have the opportunity to usher in an era of faster, bolder, more imaginative brand storytelling than ever before.

So let’s not blame the tools.

Let’s demand better creative. Let’s demand better thinking. Let’s lead with higher standards.

Because in the end, it’s not artificial intelligence that will ruin creativity.

It’s whether or not we’re willing to insist on the real thing.

Posted at MediaVillage through the Thought Leadership self-publishing platform.

Click the social buttons to share this story with colleagues and friends.
The opinions expressed here are the author's views and do not necessarily represent the views of MediaVillage.org/MyersBizNet.