Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, AI, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand Suicide, Business, Colleagues, Conformity, Consultants, Creative Development, Creativity, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Fashion, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Marketing Science, Money, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect
A few weeks ago, I found myself in Melbourne, Australia.
I had some time free so I went to the National Gallery where I saw seeing their excellent Westwood/Kawakubo fashion exhibition.
While walking around, it struck me how fashion designers talk about their point of view on society [and how they use their creativity to shape/change it] whereas modern advertising increasingly only talks about their systems and ‘proprietary’ models that drive efficiency and cost savings.
With that in mind, it’s both amusing and sad that for all the business rhetoric we spout on our stages, news pages, and LinkedIn feeds, fashion continues to have greater cultural influence, resonance, and economic impact.
And why is that?
Well, there are many reasons for it, but as someone VERY successful in fashion recently told me: “the top end of their industry is still led by people who love fashion, whereas too much of ours is run by people who crave the love of business”.
Of course, it wasn’t always this way. Go back a little and most of our advertising leaders spoke like fashion designers. And while business will always be essential to our survival – and thank god for that and them – perhaps we’d be better served championing the power of what we create, rather than only focus on the process of how we create it.
Or better yet, let the work speak for us. But not this work.
And if you think I’m being an asshole, spare a thought for all the marketing professionals who attended their MBA course at Imperial College London, when they found I was their guest lecturer. Hahaha.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Agency Culture, AI, Ambition, Attitude & Aptitude, Billionaire, Brand, Brand Suicide, Business, Comment, Communication Strategy, Community, Complicity, Confidence, Conformity, Consultants, Creative Development, Creativity, Delusion, Details, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Experience, Innovation, Insight, Leadership, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Professionalism, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Strategy, Success, Tactics, Technology
A few weeks ago, Jack Dorsey – ex-Twitter and now Block – laid off 40% of their staff.
They say this was not because they were doing badly, but because it allowed them – thanks to AI – to be even better positioned to take advantage of future opportunities.
He also said that he suspects most organisations will follow suit in the near future.
He’s not wrong … for many, reducing headcount is the ultimate commercial dream. Which got me thinking …
What will happen when every company is ‘AI’ led/driven/managed and there’s no more employees who can be ‘restructured’ to satisfy the C-Suite and/or share market?
How will companies exist when the people they once sold to, no longer have an income to keep buying their goods? How will companies compete when they all follow the same AI-led protocols, all learned from the same aggregated models and practices? How will companies build value when they’ve turned everything into a commodity? How will companies exist with ‘access per user’ business models, when AI removes the need for users? How will companies justify their price premium when they keep promoting their use of AI lets them do things for less? How will companies build trust and loyalty when everyone knows they’re being outsourced and managed by an algorithm?
One possibility is employees will suddenly be back in vogue … allowing companies to talk about how their products and/or services are now much more personal, hand crafted, and/or curated than their AI competitors. The other is – as many tech bros have suggested – we enter a world of ‘universal credit’ … except no one talks about where that money will come from and who will control the amount of money given to people.
Given there’ll be a lot less money available to be raised from taxes – as there won’t be enough people earning money from jobs – and the wealthy have an incredible ability to avoid governments taxing them appropriately, are we going to be reliant on the ‘generosity’ of the tech companies and should we feel good about that given they value power and control over a healthy society?
However none of this is AI’s fault. We’re now in a world where the obsession for short term results and/or PR headlines means everything is tactics, not much about strategy.
AI is incredible – as is its possibilities and potential – which is why when companies make a big song and dance about how they’re using it to ‘fast track’ growth and efficiencies [read: efficiencies] I can’t help but think it reveals far more about their narrow and limited thinking than the technologies.
What makes it even crazier is how the share market rewards companies for dismantling their operational structure and knowledge …
Oh I get it if you look at it in a vacuum, but not only is this behaviour often a short-term reaction – designed to boost share price at a time where bonuses or evaluations are due to take place … but why are these so called shit-hot analysts not questioning the leadership who put their company in the position of having so many alleged ‘excessive’ staff in the first place.
Because they don’t really care about anything other than the illusion of radical action.
Actions that allow them to say to themselves, ‘we were right’.
Remember Citibank back in 2008?
Forget condemning the leadership who encouraged their people to engage in a level of economic recklessness that contributed to the global financial crisis, and instead, congratulate them for firing 72,000 employees in the name of ‘efficiency management’.
As I said, I am not blaming AI for this, nor am I saying Jack Dorsey is the poster child for this attitude in management. At least in Jack’s case, he is in tech and recognises his own self interest in what he’s doing/publicising. That doesn’t make what he’s doing any better, but it at least explains his actions with more clarity than a lot of companies who have jumped into AI without seemingly realizing [or choosing to be deliberately ignorant] to the longer term implications they’re creating their own company, category and individual role.
Of course not all company leaders are like this – or doing this with AI – and I obviously appreciate it’s a competitive world out there … but to see them viewing efficiency and speed as the only levers that matter [and that is what AI is for] is pretty tragic. Add to that, many seem to have forgotten this technology is still in its relative infancy, so are basically buying into the ‘dream’ of what AI can do – as being heavily pushed by its creators/investors … which helps companies justify their heavy adoption of it, even though many of the C-Suite in those companies don’t have a clue what it is or how it works but just see the financial rewards of pretending they do … and we’re facing the very real prospect of organisations discounting or ignoring the ‘small stuff’, even though that’s what will determine if the ‘finish line’ is positive or destructive. [For more info on this, see my post about the ‘O Ring’]
As a friend of mine said, “it’s like buying a jet to do the school run”.
Mind you he also said, “beware of people selling promises they’ll never be accountable for, but will always benefit from”.
Unsurprisingly, he’s a lawyer.
In a technology firm. Haha.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, AI, Colenso, Comment, Family, Jill
Yesterday I wrote a post overflowing with love for my son and my desire to alway be there for him, even when I’m not.
Today, I am ensuring he can’t wait for me to get on with buggering off. Probably.
You see, I’ve had a beard of sorts for as long as I can remember … even before I didn’t have hair on the top of my head.
In fact the only time I’ve properly shaved was about 15 years ago when Jill wondered what I looked like without it.
Well she found out … and the answer was, I looked like a child.
We have never mentioned it again …
Anyway, recently my social media has been filled with clips of people who shaved their beards off their face to see how their family would react. Unsurprisingly, it wasn’t great. Not because – as was the case with me – they didn’t look good, but because they just looked so different.
Kids cried.
Partners trembled.
Animals growled and barked.
Now you’d think with that reaction, the idea of me even considering doing it again would never cross my mind … but it did. Fortunately, for me though, was rather than do it for real, I could turn to AI.
So I did, and this is what I look like …
Look at me!
LOOK. AT. ME!!!
Jesus Christ, I look like a fucking sex-pest.
Seriously, if I shaved and found myself looking like that, I think I’d voluntarily hand myself into the Police. Not because I’d have done anything but because I’d assume the Police would just arrest me for how I look.
And if you think I’m being hard on myself, imagine how my wonderful colleague, Gi, must be feeling given that’s kinda-how he looks every day.
Fortunately for him, he’s a much nicer, smarter and taller version than me … which means he can walk the streets without fear of arrest while also being completely safe in the knowledge I’ll never, ever shave, so he will never have to worry of being mistaken for me.
Consider that my gift to you Gi. And humanity at large.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, AI, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Focus Groups, Research, Technology
One thing I’ve always hated is the arrogance some companies/agencies have towards their customers.
Blindly believing they are so important and clever, that society will do whatever they want them to do.
Maybe that’s why so many of the methodologies companies/agencies adopt to ‘understand audiences’ does not involve directly engaging with them … and even when it does, it’s done in such a false environment, that what they get out of it are viewpoints from a vacuum rather than real life. [More of that in tomorrow’s post]
It’s only getting worse with the advent of AI … where we’re already seeing research companies using bots to interview audiences. That’s right – under the guise of ‘scale’ – they ditching trained moderators and increasingly using tech to understand the needs, motivations, fears, routines of people.
Hello dystopia!
But this is not about that … this is about the rise of AI driven ads.
Now I have no issue with that, when AI is to liberate possibility rather than drive efficiency.
Colenso have 2 famous pieces of work that openly – and publicly – embraced AI:
Our Cannes Grand-Prix winning Adoptable work for Pedigree.
And our work for our Grand-Effie winning client, Skinny.
But what I’m talking about are the rise in AI generated ‘customer endorsement ads’.
I’m seeing soooooo many of these right now … especially in the health and fitness space … where a particularly healthy, attractive and fit individual talks directly to camera about the impact a particular food/routine/supplement has had on them, WHEN THEY OBVIOUSLY DON’T REALLY EXIST.
To be fair, there is always a super on screen that explains the people in the ad are ‘AI generated’ – not that you needed it, as you can tell from how they look, speak and move – but are they doing this because they think people will blindly believe the words of a ‘human’ who has code rather than DNA, or because they just want to do things on the cheap?
Maybe it’s both …
Maybe it will work – after all, there’s people out there that think Andrew Tate is a decent human.
But why would anyone believe a company who needs to use AI generate ‘humans’ to show how good their product is?
As I’ve written many times before, I think AI is incredible.
I use it, experiment with it and explore it all the time.
And while I am a novice compared to many – while acknowledging many of the people in our industry who claim to be AI experts on Linkedin, are the same people who claimed to be experts on the Metaverse when that was ‘a thing’ – I know it has potential and power to make powerful differences to society in a myriad of amazing ways.
I also acknowledge we’ve only just started to see what it can be and become, so what I am about to say is only going to get better – or worse, depending on your perspective.
However, there is increasingly going to be a backlash against any brand or company who are seen to be embracing it to exploit rather than enable … to drive efficiency, rather possibility … to gain profits rather than deliver benefits.
And while that may take some time … both to gather steam and for companies to notice/care … it will happen and that’s when they will finally realise ‘customers have always been smart, you’ve just not done stuff that made them care about you’.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, AI, Comment, Corporate Evil, Management, Money, Music, Technology
While this post doesn’t rely on you watching this clip first, it may help explain why I have written it …
As many of you will know, I am a huge fan of technology.
Which means, I am also a huge fan of AI.
However, what I’m not a huge fan of, are the vast majority of people behind it. Or more specifically, their reasons for doing it. And the implications we’ll all encounter because of it.
It’s because of that, I’m fast coming to the view that the vast majority of tech bros, should be called terrorist bros – hence the title of this post.
Let’s be honest, for all their expensive manufactured PR claiming they want to help society ‘win at life’, we continue to watch their hunger for power, money, ego and control wreak havoc across society through their self-interest crafted half truths, delusion and manipulation.
What makes it worse is AI can do so much good for so many people so it’s doubly sad the vast majority of tech leaders [and corporate leaders] seem to just want it for pushing profit and productivity – regardless of cost or implication on everyone else both short term and long.
Which made me think …
What if another nation acted this way? Did things that were purposefully designed to destabalise how another society functioned or operated (be it environmentally, socially or economically) for their own benefit?
Would we just accept it or see it as an attack? An act of commercialism or an act of aggression?
We don’t have to look too far to see how certain countries respond to ‘perceived’ threats that aren’t anywhere near as overt or obvious as AI. [Cough cough]. So when do the tech companies get reigned in? When do we get back to valuing substance and experience not just celebrate how fast we can get to the aggregated superficial? When do we get back to investing in people and training rather than reducing and discarding?
OK, rant over. But wouldn’t it be great if we all looked up to the values and standards of Prince rather than the culture vampires like Mikey Shulman.
Finally …
How grateful are you that I don’t drink?. Can you imagine what this would be like if I did? Haha.