AI content: great for your job, bad for your company

Should we use AI to make our ads?

There are two questions hiding in that sentence, and they have opposite answers.

Question one: should your team use AI to work faster? Research, briefs, first drafts, the competitive teardown due Thursday. Genuinely: yes. Everyone already is, including us. That’s the “great for your job” half, and it’s not controversial.

Question two: should AI-generated content be the thing your buyers actually see — the ad itself, wearing your logo? That’s a different bet. You’re wagering the most expensive thing you own, trust in your brand, on content your audience is learning to spot and starting to resent.

The data on question two is rough. And it’s getting rougher every time someone measures it.

What do buyers actually think of AI-generated ads?

Klaviyo asked consumers how visibly AI-generated content changes their trust in a brand. Trust it more: 7%. Trust it less: 31%. (Consumer survey, not B2B-specific — but your buyers are these same people, on the same feeds.) That’s the whole game in two numbers. The upside is a rounding error. The downside is a third of your audience.

The Harris Poll, with the 4A’s and Infillion, found 78% of consumers say AI makes advertising feel less authentic — and that brands leaning on it too hard read as, their word, “cringey.”

And the trend line points the wrong way. Fractl’s consumer research found the share of people who say heavy AI use would decrease their trust in a favorite brand doubled in one year — 20% to 40%. For Gen Z it’s 54%. The more AI content people see, the less they like seeing it. This is the rare marketing problem that gets worse with exposure.

Why do ad execs keep shipping it anyway?

Because the industry is grading its own homework again.

IAB and Sonata Insights measured the gap directly: 82% of advertising executives believe Gen Z and Millennial consumers feel positive about AI-generated ads. The share of those consumers who actually do: 45%. The people buying the tools are off by nearly half — in the exact direction of their own convenience.

If that shape looks familiar, it should. It’s the same industry that estimates creative drives 19% of an ad’s impact when the measured answer is 49%. Same gap, different subject . When marketers guess wrong about what works, they reliably guess in whatever direction is cheapest this quarter.

The uncomfortable good news

Here’s the chain. AI makes average content nearly free. Nearly-free content gets made in bulk. Bulk content floods every feed your buyer scrolls. Everything in the flood looks like everything else in the flood. And content that looks like everything else builds no memory at all.

Which means the flood is quietly repricing the one thing it can’t produce: content people actually remember. B2B buying runs on memory — about 95% of your buyers aren’t in-market today, and the ones who enter tomorrow buy from brands they already know. That’s the whole awareness argument .

This is why we make ads the expensive-looking way on purpose: real humans, live-action, written jokes, characters who have your buyer’s actual problem. Not because we’re precious about craft. Because a human face having a recognizably bad day at work is exactly the thing the flood cannot fake — and it’s what people remember on Thursday.

freeB2Bads.com makes that math work without a new budget line: Video Brothers makes the human ads, Elite Media Group runs them, and production is funded from the media budget you already have. See how one roof works

Frequently asked questions