A staple of Coca-Cola’s brand since 1995 has been its “Holidays are coming!” advertising campaign. Complete with their signature red trucks and the iconic jingle, it has been one of the most successful holiday campaigns worldwide — until this year.
The official Coca-Cola YouTube channel released its newest addition to the campaign on Nov. 18. Created entirely using artificial intelligence (AI), it sparked immense backlash online.
“Thanks, I hate it … it certainly lacks the heart and charm of some of their past holiday bear ads,” said a user on Reddit. Others have plainly stated that it’s “soulless,” “boring” and “looks cheap,” with the consensus being that it is disappointing, especially given that the company has more than enough funding to pay artists instead of using AI. Alex Hirsch, animator and creator of “Gravity Falls,” expressed his discontent in a post on X, saying, “FUN FACT: @CocaCola is ‘red’ because it’s made from the blood of out-of-work artists!”
However, the company stands firmly by its choice to create the advert using AI.
In a statement to the New York Times, a spokesperson for Coca-Cola stated that the company “has celebrated a long history of capturing the magic of the holidays [digitally] for decades … This year, we crafted films through a collaboration of human storytellers and the power of generative A.I.”
Pratik Thakar, Coca-Cola’s vice president and head of generative AI, explained to Ad Age that the company wanted to connect its traditions of the campaign to the future of technology. Additionally, he emphasizes that the company saves both the money and time it would take traditional artists to execute the same ideas.
“More than cost, it’s the speed … And then you can do more,” Thakar said. “And that’s the way to go, with resources, rather than doing less and spending less.”
The dialogue about the use of AI in art remains at the forefront as it continues to become more ubiquitous. The general backlash reflects a broader cultural tension between scientific and technological progress while preserving the integrity of creative work. As the line between innovation and exploitation blurs, important questions are raised about how technology should be used responsibly in art and media — which is completely uncharted territory. The challenge lies in finding a way to use AI that respects artists and aids in creativity instead of replacing it.
AI models are trained using existing art, often without permission from the original artists. Therefore, many argue that it’s not possible for AI to actually “create” something from scratch, as everything produced is just an amalgamation of the input it was trained on, which already crosses an ethical and legal boundary. While proponents of AI art argue that artists use images around them for inspiration knowingly or unknowingly all the time, AI samples the art rather than taking inspiration from them as it’s impossible for machines to do so.
In addition to the already murky ethical territory of using an AI model to create images, there is the ethical issue of using generated images in entertainment to cut corners on spending when there is an opportunity to provide an artist with a job.
The trend of using AI in movies and television appears to have begun with Disney using AI-generated images in the credit sequence for the show “Secret Invasion.” With Marvel valued at over $29 billion, many were disappointed at Marvel’s choice to generate images instead of hiring artists to do the same work. Similar backlash was expressed for the films “Late Night with the Devil” and “Civil War,” both of which utilized AI images in some form.
An extremely concerning case of the use of AI images was in the Netflix true crime documentary “What Jennifer Did,” which detailed Jennifer Pan’s orchestration of the murder of her mother and attempted murder of her father. In an alleged attempt to portray Pan as a normal girl initially thought to be a victim, it appears that an AI-generated image of her smiling and holding up peace signs to the camera was used.
While executive producer Jeremy Grimaldi denies claims that the images were generated, he did not provide any explanation for the irregularities in the photo that usually accompany AI-generated images, like hands without fingers and books with illegible covers. Especially in the case of true crime documentaries, producers and directors have a responsibility to present the truth as it was to the best of their abilities. The violation of trust between viewers and creators about whether the truth was really presented did not go unnoticed, with the documentary garnering backlash from many.
The adverse reaction toward the use of AI-generated images extends beyond questions of efficiency and cost-cutting. As seen with Coca-Cola’s holiday campaign and other high-profile instances, the criticism received is due to the lack of authenticity, the impact on jobs for artists and the ethical implications of the use of generated images. A silver lining of the use of AI in art is that there is direct proof in the industry that the human touch is necessary for authentic artistry and storytelling, with consumers being strongly against the lack of emotion and generally uncanny valley-ness of AI-generated content.
Ananya Kashyap is an Arts and Entertainment Intern for the fall 2024 quarter. She can be reached at ananyask@uci.edu.
Edited by June Min.
