Unpopular opinion by a CEO: If AI wins at Cannes, did a human even compete?

22 Jul 2025

The problem: Are we rewarding creativity, or just clever engineering?

Unpopular opinion by a CEO: If AI wins at Cannes, did a human even compete?

This year, Cannes Lions shortlisted multiple AI-generated campaigns – and the industry applauded. “Revolutionary,” some said. “Democratizing creativity,” claimed others. But here's the real question: Are we confusing automation with inspiration?

When we hand awards to generative AI campaigns, we’re not celebrating creativity – we’re celebrating efficiency. That’s not the same thing.

The pros of AI in creative work

Speed and scale: AI can generate hundreds of concepts in seconds, streamlining ideation and execution.

Cost-effective: Agencies can save time, headcount, and overhead with AI-generated design and copy.

Data-driven relevance: AI uses performance data to generate what it thinks will convert best.

Accessibility: Smaller teams can now compete with big agencies by leveraging AI tools.

The dark side of awarding AI

Devalues human creativity: Craft, storytelling, and emotional nuance are often missing in AI work.

Lack of originality: AI is derivative by nature – it remixes existing content, not invents.

Questionable authorship: Who gets the credit? The prompt engineer? The machine? The client?

Reinforces bias: AI trained on flawed data can unintentionally reinforce stereotypes, clichés, and cultural missteps.

The controversy: Can a machine win for ‘creative thinking’?

Cannes Lions 2025 saw multiple campaigns created entirely using tools like Midjourney, Sora, Runway, and ChatGPT. Judges praised them for 'originality' and 'breakthrough execution'. But how can something be original if it was trained on everything that came before it?

A recent WARC report revealed that 54% of award submissions in 2025 included some level of AI generation – and many had no clear disclosure of where the machine’s role ended and human input began.

Is the industry just celebrating novelty? Or are we lowering the bar for what counts as creative?

The brand war: Who’s embracing AI, and who’s rejecting it?

Coca-Cola: Their award-winning AI-driven 'Masterpiece' campaign used DALL-E and Runway to blend art and advertising, winning praise for pushing boundaries.

DDB: The global agency issued a manifesto refusing to enter work created purely by AI, saying “human creativity isn’t optional.”

Heinz: Leaned into AI with its “This Is What Ketchup Looks Like” campaign generated entirely by neural networks – and people loved it.

Wieden+Kennedy: Publicly criticized the “AI hype cycle” and committed to crafting brand stories “with soul.”

What social media is saying

LinkedIn is buzzing with heated threads:

Creative directors argue that “AI should be a tool, not a trophy winner.”

Gen Z creatives embrace AI as an equal collaborator.

Some jurors admit they can’t tell which entries are AI vs human-made anymore – and that’s the point.
X (formerly Twitter) is even sharper:

“If you didn’t write the copy, design the visual, or shoot the content – should you get an award for it?”

“AI ads winning creative awards is like a microwave dinner winning MasterChef.”

The future: Are creatives just prompt writers now?

If the trend continues:

Expect Prompt Director to become a full-time agency role.

Awards shows may introduce a “Best Use of AI” category to sidestep the debate.

Human-created campaigns might be judged differently – or dismissed entirely for being too 'slow'.

By 2030, we could see AI-created films, sonic identities, and even OOH campaigns sweeping the awards season – with no human hands ever touching the work.

The big question: Should awards celebrate imagination, or execution?

Wetpaint Advertising leverages African market insights and cutting-edge tech to deliver tailored, full-service solutions that elevate your brand and drive measurable success.