Has Data Taken the Warmth Out of Advertising?

From a marketing enthusiast’s perspective, is there a recent campaign or case study that you find particularly insightful or thought-provoking?
Marketing is evolving with consumers themselves. But at the same time, one has to understand that in many cases, advertising is becoming somewhat mechanical. If you watch enough advertisements today, you can almost predict how some of them will unfold. Advertisements serve two distinct purposes. One is obviously to communicate information about the brand: what it is, what it offers, and how it differentiates itself. But the second purpose is more subtle. It is about creating a brand vibe. And creating that vibe requires a deep connection to consumers’ everyday lives. Now, I am not saying that brands are not trying to do this. They certainly are. But something like the innocence of advertising has slowly disappeared. By innocence, I mean the spontaneity and joy that used to be present earlier. If you look at older advertisements — for example, classic Amul campaigns or early Fevicol advertisements — they made you laugh, they made you cry, they made you enjoy the moment. There was warmth in them. Today, advertisements perform extremely well by the metrics. And there are now many metrics, far more sophisticated than what we had 20 years ago. Earlier, we had simple measures like recall of the advertisement or recall of the content. Today, everything is extremely data-driven. But the question I often ask myself is: can data replace that warmth? It reminds me of writing something using AI. The output is extremely polished. It is statistically perfect. But it often lacks those small human imperfections — follies, if you may call them — which sometimes make things more beautiful.

With AI now embedded in most marketing workflows, are marketers enhancing human insight or slowly outsourcing critical thinking?
You see, AI is evolving almost every day. Whatever we understand today may become outdated tomorrow. I still do not fully understand how these algorithms work. But one thing is very clear: AI has an enormous capacity to organise and process information quickly. In that sense, it is a blessing. It can solve many productivity problems. However, the real question is not just about persuasion or productivity. The question is about accountability. Can AI be made accountable? I do not have an answer to that. For example, in many global conflicts unfolding today, some analysts suggest that algorithmic systems and AI tools are involved in decision-making. But does the algorithm consider the broader consequences for humanity? Or does it only calculate outcomes in terms of material losses or efficiencies? We really do not know. And accountability becomes even more important when AI systems start giving suggestions that may be harmful. There have been cases where AI tools have generated instructions for dangerous activities. If we cannot embed accountability within these systems, the implications could be serious. Another issue is that excessive precision may remove something very human from our lives. As human beings, we have the luxury of making mistakes. And through mistakes, we learn not only individually but across generations. If we eliminate that possibility in the pursuit of perfect optimisation, we may lose an important aspect of human learning and creativity.

Many students today struggle with aligning their personal values, especially around sustainability, with careers in marketing. What is your perspective on this tension?
I hesitate to advise because every generation has its own sensibilities. But what I can say is this: when we talk about sustainability today, we must recognise that much of the problem is a generational one. For a long time, we have assumed that the Earth can provide us with anything and everything we want. The entire framework of economic development and marketing as a discipline has historically been designed to stimulate consumption. The idea was simple: the more people consume, the better it is for the economy. But that has created a vicious cycle. More consumption leads to still more consumption. Now the question is: can marketing step out of that cycle? It cannot do so completely. There are positive developments, especially among younger generations who are becoming more conscious of sustainability. But sustainability is not only about individual behaviour. If I personally stop using plastic bags, that alone will not solve the problem. The issue is systemic. It requires policy changes, corporate responsibility, and broader institutional action. At the end of the day, the real challenge is recognising the thin line between need and greed. Until we learn to draw that line more clearly, sustainability will remain a difficult challenge.

Marketing messages today are scrutinised more closely for their political and social implications. Do you see this sensitivity as progress toward responsible marketing?
It is both a progress and a constraint. Consumers today are more aware of what companies are doing, and they sometimes respond through boycotts or protests. In some cases, people have even called for boycotts of technologies like ChatGPT, claiming they are indirectly supporting certain geopolitical activities. Now, prolonged boycotts may not always be practical. But consumers absolutely have the right to punish companies when they feel something is wrong. Just as companies can hire and fire employees, consumers also have the right to “fire” companies. These actions act as checks and balances in the marketplace. They remind companies that they cannot take their customers for granted.

We are seeing the rise of trends like the attention economy and “little treat culture,” where people reward themselves with small indulgences. How do you interpret this shift?
Broader social and political changes always shape consumer behaviour. If you look at social media today, people often talk about how many followers they have or how many likes they receive. But behind all this, there is increasing evidence that people are becoming lonelier. Followership and genuine warmth from another human being are two very different things. So, attention- seeking behaviour often becomes a compensatory response. Self-gifting is not a bad thing. If you have achieved something and want to reward yourself, that is perfectly fine. But if consumption becomes the only way through which we try to fill emotional gaps, then that suggests something deeper is wrong. Marketing has shifted from celebrity endorsements to influencer marketing.

Do you see individual creators becoming the future of brand endorsements?
Marketers have always been quick to adapt to changes. The limitations of celebrity endorsements were understood long ago. But earlier, there were very few alternatives. With digital platforms, ordinary people now have a voice. That creates credibility. But there is an interesting cycle here. When influencers grow large enough, they become celebrities themselves. For example, some YouTube influencers today are earning enormous amounts of money and building massive audiences. At that point, they become just as influential — and sometimes just as expensive — as traditional celebrities.

With the rise of hyper-personalised marketing, is the discipline becoming more powerful or more complicated?
It is both. I like to compare this with painting. Some paintings require extremely fine strokes. Others use broad brush strokes. Both approaches can produce beautiful results, depending on the context. Similarly, hyper-personalisation opens new possibilities for marketers. Technology has enabled the creation of products and services for extremely specific segments. Startups today often target micro-segments rather than mass markets. This creates new opportunities. But the fundamental challenge remains the same: how well you understand your consumers.

What are the biggest challenges that future chief marketing officers will face?
The biggest challenge will be balancing efficiency with purpose. Technology will make marketing incredibly precise. Data systems allow marketers to understand each consumer. But consumers themselves will also become more aware of how they are being targeted. They may develop tools to monitor or resist marketing practices. So the real question will be: can marketers balance technological efficiency with responsibility, privacy, and purpose? That, I believe, will be the defining challenge for the next generation of marketing leaders.