Coca-Cola’s latest holiday ad, launched on November 5, 2025, was a grand experiment in the use of artificial intelligence for creative visual generation. Despite the involvement of a hundred-strong human team and the production of an astounding 70,000 AI-generated clips, the final result has been widely criticized for its subpar quality. This ambitious yet flawed endeavor underscores the tension between the promise of cutting-edge technology and the reality of its practical application in the advertising industry.
The Scale of Coca-Cola’s AI Experiment
For the first time, Coca-Cola ventured into the realm of AI-driven video production for its holiday campaign, aiming to revolutionize the ad creation process with generative tools. A team of exactly 100 staff members was assembled to oversee the project, their roles spanning from the initial conceptualization to the final assembly of the ad. The scale of the experiment was further amplified by the production of a staggering 70,000 AI-generated clips, serving as the raw material for the final product.
However, despite the impressive numbers, the project’s ambition was not matched by its execution. The final ad, a product of this massive AI experiment, was met with widespread criticism for its poor quality, raising questions about the practicality and effectiveness of AI in creative industries.
Human Labor in the AI Workflow
The 100 staff members played crucial roles in the project, despite the central role of AI in content creation. Tasks such as prompt engineering, clip selection, and editing required human intervention and expertise. The team reportedly worked tirelessly over weeks, manually curating the AI-generated visuals to mitigate inconsistencies and ensure a holiday-themed narrative.
However, even with this extensive human involvement, the final product fell short of expectations. The ad’s poor quality highlighted the limitations of AI in creative tasks and the indispensable role of human creativity and judgment.
AI Generation: Volume vs. Quality
The production of 70,000 AI-generated clips was a testament to the capabilities of generative video models. The sheer quantity of clips was intended to provide a plethora of options for creating a cohesive narrative. However, the result was a fragmented and incoherent output, demonstrating a critical flaw in the AI generation process.
The high volume of clips, rather than ensuring quality, seemed to exacerbate the problem. The AI failed to produce a consistent style across the clips, leading to a disjointed and visually unappealing final product.
Visual Flaws in the Final Ad
The ad was widely criticized for its visual flaws, including unnatural animations and artifacts in the AI-generated elements. Viewers and experts alike agreed that the ad looked like garbage, a stark contrast to the high-quality, emotionally resonant ads that Coca-Cola is known for.
The poor execution of the ad served as a stark reminder of the limitations of AI in creative tasks. Despite the production of 70,000 clips, the AI was unable to overcome these inherent limitations, resulting in a final product that was widely panned for its poor quality.
Behind-the-Scenes Challenges
The 100 staff members faced numerous logistical hurdles during the project. They had to sift through thousands of AI outputs to find usable footage for the campaign, a task that was both time-consuming and challenging. Technical issues, such as mismatched styles across the 70,000 generated clips, further complicated the production process and prolonged the project timeline.
These challenges underscore the difficulties of integrating AI into creative workflows. Despite the promise of AI as a tool for content creation, its practical application in advertising remains fraught with challenges.
Industry Reactions to the Coke Ad
The ad’s poor quality drew backlash from advertising professionals. Despite the significant investment in human resources and AI-generated clips, the final product was widely regarded as a failure. Comparisons to past Coca-Cola holiday ads further highlighted the shortcomings of the AI-generated ad, which lacked the emotional appeal and visual quality that the brand is known for.
The negative reception of the ad serves as a cautionary tale for other brands considering the use of AI in their advertising campaigns. The failure of this ambitious experiment underscores the limitations of AI in creative tasks and the importance of human creativity and judgment in advertising.
Future of AI in Advertising
The lessons from this project are clear: even with a team of 100 human staff, AI’s shortcomings in creative tasks cannot be fully compensated for. The production of 70,000 clips did not guarantee quality, and the final product was widely criticized for its poor execution.
As brands like Coca-Cola continue to explore the use of AI in advertising, they must carefully consider the limitations of the technology and the critical role of human creativity. The reception of the ad, widely regarded as garbage on its launch day, serves as a stark reminder of the gap between the promise of AI and its practical application in creative industries. Source: Futurism
More from MorningOverview