“AI slop” was named the word of the year for 2025 by Merriam-Webster. Consumers are clearly becoming more aware of the overuse of manufacturing technology and are becoming increasingly resistant to it, especially if it degrades their experience. The art community has seen some of the strongest backlash and products that process artificial intelligence in art should proceed with care.
The cautionary tales already exist. Brands like Coca-Cola, Svedka and H&M have openly promoted their use of AI in marketing, to steady criticism. That creates understandable skepticism. But refusing to use this technology completely creates your own risk. Brands may fall behind or overspend just to maintain the same level of awareness and resonance.
What drives this reaction? More importantly, is there a way to use AI in product creation without damaging consumer trust?
Your customers are searching everywhere. Make sure it’s your product he appears.
The SEO toolkit you know, and the AI visibility data you need.
Start a Free Trial
Start with
Two Coca-Cola campaigns, two very different results
Let’s look at two examples, both from Coca-Cola. The brand released a holiday ad titled “Holidays Are Coming.” It featured a few minutes of Coke-branded trucks traveling through animated locations in a style consistent with its seasonal campaigns. The response was immediate and negative.
Observers labeled it as AI slop, criticizing both the concept and the execution. Many pointed out that the script sounded one-note, as if it had been produced from scratch. Others saw inconsistencies in every scene, including visual details, character designs and even the Coca-Cola logo itself. The work gives the impression that cost reduction and speed were prioritized over product authenticity.
To make matters worse, Coca-Cola publicly emphasized the role of AI in production, which increased scrutiny.
In contrast, the ad titled “Coca-Cola Masterpiece” also relied heavily on AI but was very well received. The concept felt original. The real use of AI is extended rather than simulated. The story unfolds in a way that would be difficult, if not impossible, to happen through conventional production.
Community support for this campaign is focused on the artists involved, not the technology. Viewer responses reflected that difference, with comments such as “It wasn’t made by AI. It was made by humans using AI. I feel the feelings of the person who made this ad.”
Technology does not justify smallness
Marketers already rely on disinformation tools. The explosion is exaggerated. Cars don’t drive on Mars. Consumers accept this because the story works.
But when those tools are misused, people take notice. Bad visual effects, inconsistent editing or weak performance break the immersion. AI is no different. A new tool that needs its own standards.
In the holiday ad, viewers got lazy. The story was little or completely lost. Instead of creating a connection, the ad stacked Coca-Cola’s visual symbols in visual order. That kind of flatness is easy to spot and hard to ignore. “Attack of the Body Raptors” in marketing form.
The aesthetic inconsistency made it worse. Visual errors and mismatched styles interfered with what you were doing and showed a lack of control, which would not have been possible with conventional technology. Whether the problem was immature technology, weak awareness or misunderstanding, the result felt indifferent.
Then there is the moral ambiguity. Where did the basics come from? Was it licensed? Is it based on an existing creative work? Even if the output matches the established style of the product, the line is often blurred. That uncertainty makes people uncomfortable.
A better way to approach AI in art
These failures point to a set of clear principles, reinforced by strong examples of successful advertisements.
- Use AI to extend imagination, not replace art.
- Be honestly busy.
- Protect usage rights and control your input.
Expand your imagination
Generative AI works when it works for a narrative. It fails when it replaces itself. The audience can tell when something is being produced without care. If AI is used primarily to reduce production costs or to replace human creativity, the effect is felt to be diminished. It removes the purpose of telling a story.
Campaigns like Svedka’s AI-produced Super Bowl ad “Shake Your Bots Off” made the technology itself the focus and the concept was affected as a result, especially by the same studio behind Coca-Cola’s 2025 “Holidays Are Coming” ad.
But when AI enables something truly new, it becomes additive. It allows brands to tell stories that weren’t possible before. That change changes the way work is received.
Focus on honesty
There is an entire subculture dedicated to finding mistakes and discontinuities in creative work. AI-generated content gives them a bright, shiny target, as seen in McDonald’s Netherlands’ AI holiday ad for “The Worst Time of the Year,” where visual inconsistencies and misinformation quickly drew criticism.
Be interested in the details. Logos must be exact. Visuals should be consistent. Even subtle anomalies should be removed unless they are intentional. These problems are symptoms of a deeper problem: AI-generated content often feels inauthentic. Traditionally produced work does not exhibit these errors in the same way. When they appear, they show the viewer that something is off and that impression is immediately associated with your brand.
Your goal is to secure an immersive viewer experience, avoid the uncanny valley and maintain the integrity of your brand. Quality is the canary in your AI-generated coal mine.
Protect usage rights
Start by inheriting your product or having an express license. Make sure those rights extend to AI-driven use cases. Where possible, develop procedures that include approval of the use of similarities or materials in the final output.
Virgin Voyages provides a strong example. The brand captured a video of Jennifer Lopez and allowed customers to use it to create personalized invitations. The foundation was licensed, regulated and targeted.
On the other end of the spectrum, H&M, Levi’s and Mango have received backlash for their use of AI-generated digital twin models, raising concerns about consent, compensation and displacement of human talent.
Beyond privileges, tightly control what goes into the model. Limit entries to approved properties, like references. Do not leave this open.
Keep it to yourself or have a reason not to
One pattern across the most criticized campaigns is the way brands advertise their use of AI. Press releases, explanations, behind-the-scenes content. Everything invites scrutiny. If the work is strong, it should stand without explanation.
If you choose to highlight AI, make sure there is a clear reason. Nike’s use of AI to match between 1999 and 2017 Serena Williams is a good example. That story could have been told in a different way.
AI-driven creative standards must be met
Before posting AI-generated art, be clear about the implications of using AI. Marketing budgets are shrinking, and cutting costs is a valid reason. But if you can confidently answer these three questions, it may be more effective to not advertise at all:
- Is this a supplement? Does AI make this idea more interesting?
- Is this respectful? Are the rights, equality and consideration of employees considered?
- Is this good? Could we distribute this regardless of the source of production?
Consumers are not rejecting AI. They refuse to be ignored. This reversal is a signal to increase the level. Generative AI is not a shortcut. It is a tool for telling ambitious and original stories. Brands that treat it as an artistic tool will gain trust instead of losing it.
