Advertising in the Age of AI with Sean Sweeney Part 2 (284)

In part two of our conversation with Sean Sweeney, we dig into the messy, real-world intersection of AI, advertising, and the future of work. From whether brands should disclose AI-generated creative to what “authenticity” even means in marketing, Sean and Matt openly disagree, and that’s where the gold is.

We explore the legal and practical angles of AI disclosure, the double standards between AI and past production techniques, and how fast-evolving tools are reshaping creative teams. We also zoom out to the bigger picture: which jobs are most at risk, why upskilling is non-negotiable, and how the “age of AI” might elevate live performance and human connection rather than replace it. If you’re leading a brand or building your career, this episode is a field guide to preparing for the dip and coming out stronger on the other side.

Highlights: AI in ad creative and whether consumers care, the liability lens for disclosure, authenticity vs. effectiveness in marketing, double standards across AI/CGI/music, job loss and creation (and the gap in between), the urgency of upskilling, real-world automation from warehouses to robotics at home, and why human-centered experiences could thrive in an automated economy. Connect with Sean Sweeney on LinkedIn for ongoing insights (link in show notes), and don’t miss part one for PMax, geo tracking, and where brands quietly lose money.

 https://www.firstpositiondigitalsolutions.com/ 

Looking for a podcast guest? Author Matt Rouse
Hook Digital Marketing | Hook Digital Marketing Canada
Market your local business on autopilot: SMB Autopilot

Hello, everyone. This is Mehak here, and we are back for part two with Sean Sweeney and Matt Rouse.

If you haven't listened to part one yet, go do that first because it covers performance max, geo tracking,

why SEO is in dead, and a lot of practical stuff about where brands are quietly losing money.

Part two picks up in a different gear.

This one actually gets into AI disclosure

in advertising,

whether AI is actually going to take jobs and what that shift really looks like from the inside. And here's the thing, Sean and Matt don't agree on everything in this one, which honestly makes it more interesting.

So let's dive right into it. Your hosts.

Matt Wiles and Mae Heckenham,

welcome you to the show.

The Digital Marketing Masters podcast.

Talk about advertising and SEO

in the age of AI

with our special guest.

The blues brother of pay per click,

the Chicago search man,

Sean Sweeney.

Some of our clients don't have a creative agency, can't afford one. Right. So we're trying to develop a streamlined creative

process where if they don't even have a lot of assets

using an image, building out a video, knowing that it's AI based, like, they'll know, you know, that we're not messing around. But then, also,

we can we can build creative that suits LinkedIn,

you know, Meta, etcetera, that kinda will spit it out for those

particular specs as well. Like, I know Canva can do some of that, but not exactly the way we need it. I wanted to always focus on full funnel marketing using good data and driving outcomes. And then but what I'm realizing now is

creatives I wouldn't say it's becoming a commodity. Not at all. My friends would really kill me if I actually Right.

But I do think it's getting a little bit more commoditized.

As long as there's some authenticity behind the brand, they don't care if it's the consumers won't care if there's an AI

generated ads for the client or for the brand. Right? And so if we can offer something that can fill the gap for a short period of time for our clients, I think we should be able to do that as a service.

Yeah. I think it depends it depends a bit on what type of brand it is. Yeah. And and I think also and and I was gonna mention this earlier

about authenticity

in marketing.

Like, let's face it. Some of the biggest brands in the world,

they have

a

beautiful supermodel

in a tiny dress laying with a tiger on top of a white pedestal. This is not an authentic

reflection

of real life. Right. Right?

People can take a grain of salt with reality

in advertising.

Is this real or is this slop?

And I don't think that that is a comparison. And also, I know for a fact that no one's gonna know the difference six months from now. We're already at the point that they basically, no one could tell.

Everybody thinks they can tell because when they think of that, they think of times that they could tell

which are in the past.

Right? It's funny. I I think a lot about, before he kinda went off the deep end. Elon Musk was talking about someone asked him if we're in you know, is this real life, or are we in a simulation?

And he used the I'm a gamer.

I've been a gamer my whole life, and

he used the, example of of rock star games, Red Dead Redemption.

And he said, look at where we went from 1980 with pong

to Red Dead Redemption

in the in the February.

You know, I think it's 2,000 that came out or maybe earlier than that, February the odds maybe. And he's like, look at the, like, realization

of those worlds within that shorter time span.

And his point was, it's like,

he could see why people feel like we're in a simulation because,

like, to we're gonna go from Red Dead Redemption to, like, what's out there now. Like, I was looking at GTA is coming out with their new version, and I saw the visuals, and you're just Are they?

Yeah.

I mean, you're looking at the visuals and you're like,

what the heck? Like, it just looks so real, like, cinematic.

And even, like, these Star Wars games coming out. So it's like, I agree with you. I think you're not gonna be able to distinguish at some point soon. No. Whether that's a year from now or two years from now, I think creatively, you're not gonna be able to distinguish, which I it's also why I feel like to have that trust with the consumer,

we still need to signify what's AI and what's not.

Certainly,

in the advertising, I feel like that's a fair shake to consumers to let them know. And I don't think it's a it's harmful to the brand.

You see, I'm I'm not on board with that, and I'll tell you why. Okay.

No one in advertising in the past, for maybe, like, twenty something years ago Yeah. Has had to say, this was used with special effects.

Or this is not an actual McDonald's hamburger. It's painted.

It has green paper instead of lettuce. Oh, that's good point. Yeah. Right? Like These are not really burgers. Used in this video. Like,

the only warning you get is, like, it looks like somebody's driving through the mountains, but there's a little asterisk that says professional driver on closed course Right. Which is still fake. Right. Because you're not a professional driver, and you're not driving on a closed course. So Yeah. The idea of real versus fake in advertising

is a complete sham. It's never been real.

Oh, wow. I think Matt just said something that sounds controversial,

but is actually historically accurate.

I think advertising

has never been real. The supermodel with the tiger on the white pedestal,

the perfectly stacked McDonald's

burger

that nobody has ever actually received through a drive through window.

None of it was ever authentic.

And here's a fun fact. I used to work for ad films as an assistant director,

And I can say that the idea

that AI

somehow crosses a line that advertising

has never respected in the first place is a little bit of a stretch.

Because even with the production houses I've worked with before, the question was never, is this real?

The question has always been, does this work? And if not, what can make it work? I get that. But now we're in a world we're in a very litigious world. Right? Mhmm. And I also know that someone's

on trial

I think OpenAI is on trial for that kid committing suicide because told

him to.

And I think it's not too far of a reach for someone to do the same thing

against an advertiser

that didn't disclose that that hot girl with the tiger on the white pedestal

wasn't real.

Because I do think there's a lot of people out there where reality is very distorted.

And I think that that's true. That's why I think it it needs to be disclosed

as a cover. If and for no other reason, a legal cover for the brands

Yeah. You know, to to be like, hey. This is AI. We're telling you this is AI. Don't do this at home. Kind of the same thing what they would do with the stunt. I

think Sean's counter is actually the more practical one here because forget the ethics debate for a second. Think about the liability.

Disclosing AI use isn't just about being honest with consumers, but it's about protecting the brand legally.

That framing

makes a lot more sense in the world we're actually operating in right now.

I think both of them are right about different parts of this, is what makes it a genuinely interesting debate for us.

Yeah. Living in a world where AI exists, I think we need to have the general understanding that things are

potentially not what they seem.

And

I don't think that any amount of labeling is gonna fix that problem

because misinformation is not labeled.

So what do we just let the misinformation run? And I think from an advertising standpoint,

if you tell the AI to write a book about beekeeping

and it spits out the book and you say, make a cover for this book, and it makes a cover and you upload it to KDP and you sell that book, I think you should label that as AI generated.

Yeah.

But

if I write the book

and I tell it what I want to be on the cover and then I go tweak that in Canva, I don't think I should have to label that as AI content. I agree with wrote it, and I I even though AI was used in the production

Yeah. I think a perfect example

is AI use in the music world. Oh, it's If you say write me a song

or generate me a song,

a blues song about Taco Tuesday, since it's on my shirt I don't love it. And it makes a Taco Tuesday song, that's that's not your song. But if you're a songwriter and you write a song and the AI generates the music with your lyrics,

somehow, according to, like,

music distribution companies,

that you're not a musician.

But if you're a songwriter and you gave it to another band and that band generated the music and made the song, now you're a musician. Even though in both cases,

you had nothing to do with the generation of the music.

Not the music. Yes. Publishing rights to the lyrics. Right. But you made the lyrics. Right? So does that make you a musician or songwriter or not? And that's that's the question. And some people will be, if you use AI, it's not. But if you use real musicians, it is. And I'm like, that's a that's a double standard. And Yeah. I'm not arguing

that we should all generate AI music. I'm just saying that there are too many double standards in it and that No. We shouldn't bias against the use of AI

compared to the use of CGI or the use of other technologies that have happened in the past.

Everybody says, well, everybody's gonna lose their job from AI, but everybody was gonna lose their job from the industrial revolution, and everybody was gonna lose their job for the Internet.

So Yeah. You know? That's another that's another topic, yeah, that we can go into, like, at length, but it was interesting.

Because I did write a book about it. Yeah. You did. Yes.

Well, oh, it's part two. Version two. I love it. Version two. So I was at a this is really interesting. I was at this event called Bureau of Advertising or Bureau of Digital rather. It's a new it's a it's it's been around for a long time. I was not aware of it.

And I went to my first event there, and I was just blown away. I mean, it was one of those situations where it's like, you wanna be in a room with people that where you're not the smartest guy in the room. You wanna be in the room with smartest people. That was the room I was in. And it was mind blowing. And one of the things that people go up there and display, like, here's what we built for our agents. It's all agency owners and

developing agencies as well developer agencies as well as media agencies.

And it was only, like, 40 of us. And, you know, people go up there and, like, show their what what they built for a solution for themselves or for their clients or whatever. And they really, like, walk through the detail of it. It was really great. And they're thinking behind it and all that. There's one gentleman who

who

built essentially

a fully automated

AI agent agent content agency.

And he walked us through it, and he he named all the agents by name, like Bob and Jill. And Right. I totally do that too.

And, man, it sparked quite the debates internally

between the group between people in the group. Like,

one side was like, you shouldn't put a human name to a machine.

You're you're devaluing the value of humans when you do that.

And then the other and machines aren't gonna take over human jobs anyway

in mass. Right? That was one side.

The other side was like, this is where it's going. You might as well get there as fast as you can. I'm giving you a road map to show you how to do it.

I tend to be on the first side in terms of, like, I don't think it's gonna take as many jobs as people think.

I do think that there are certain levels of jobs that will be affected more and certain types of jobs

that you know, things that involve math, like accounting. And I I things like, I do think it's it's it already is hurting our creative friends in the industry that don't adopt these tools and make themselves better. But I do think that as long as people upskill and have these

skill sets to work with these tools to make their job skills better for themselves, they're gonna be worth more to the to the to the company that they work for. But, man, it was a real,

like, discussion where people felt strongly on both sides. Like, one's like, you this is where it's going. You better get there as fast as you can or else you're gonna lose. And the other was like, humans have to be at the center of this or else you're gonna lose.

Naming

AI agents Bob and Jill sparked exactly the debate that's happening everywhere right now. Are we moving too fast or not too fast enough? And I think honestly both sides have a point. The people saying humans need to stay central aren't wrong and the people saying get on the road map or get left behind

aren't wrong either. The tension between those two things is basically the whole conversation

about AI and work right now. What I will say though working in creative and

seeing this every day is that people who are upskilling alongside the tools are

becoming genuinely

more valuable,

not less. I'm on the road map side.

And

Yeah. The reason being,

besides the fact that I wrote two books about it and spent four and a half years researching it now,

I believe there is gonna be significant job loss.

And I also believe there's gonna be significant job creation,

but I think there's gonna be a gap between those two things. Yeah.

And I really believe that

there's gonna be winners and losers

when it comes to job loss and things when that kind of process is is really starting, which it's kind of already started. Yeah. And I think that

you really have a choice, and that choice is,

are you gonna prepare for the dip and getting out the other side, or do you wanna try and win now before the dip so that you don't have to have the problem of hoping that there's a job for you or creating a job for yourself on the other side. And that's kind of a choice that people have to make for themselves.

I think Matt just framed the AI and jobs conversation in the most useful way I've heard it put. It's not about whether there will be a tip. It's about whether you are preparing for it now or hoping

to survive it later.

And I think that is genuinely a choice people can make.

Working in creative,

I feel that pressure every single day. The tools are moving fast. Upskilling isn't an option anymore.

I honestly didn't know how to use half the tools before I joined Matt. And by the time I got used to them, their capabilities went up like three times just in the matter of six months. Time horizon too. Right? Like, how what's your time horizon to where you're gonna Right. Potentially retire or whatever. Yeah. Look. Everybody can bet against a technology if they want to,

and the technology side

is not always right.

It doesn't always win.

Look at a bunch of the crap that happened around, like, meta horizons

and NFTs,

and there's lots of technologies that people were like, I'm not on board with this, and then it didn't come to fruition,

and they're better for it.

But

I don't think this is one of them. I think this is

as, like, my friend Marv says, this is the the new Internet. This is the next thing.

And I agree. It's not the next thing

as in the next trend. It's the next thing as in

it's the age of AI now just like we had the age of the steam engine in the industrial revolution and the silicon revolution.

And I think we're at a point that

it's really hard to figure it out, but if it was easy, everyone would do it. Right.

I agree with you a 100%. I say this all the time. I think this is as big as when the Internet broke in the in the early two thousands,

you know, in in the nineties. Like Yeah. It was it was so new to us, we were all freaking out, like, this gonna be more gonna lose our jobs? Like, when computers

felt the same way, like, we're gonna lose jobs. When the credit card came out, it was like, we're not gonna have money anymore. It just didn't come to fruition. Those those fears didn't come to fruition. But I do

agree that this is different, and I think it it is a seismic shift

in

how our society is gonna operate, not just around advertising at all, but just in general, how our society is gonna operate. And I'll I'll take it to a personal level. You know, my daughter,

she's graduating high school this year. She's going she wants to go to musical theater. She wants something. She'd love to be on Broadway someday. Don't know if she'll ever get there, but she that's what she would love to do. And her mom and I are like, it's a tough road, man. It's a tough road. You don't make a lot of money. You know? But all I keep thinking about in the back of my head is like, well, if we all do lose our jobs

and we have guaranteed income from our from our,

governments because if we have to supplement people living

and spending in an economy,

what are people gonna do? They're gonna go see shows. They're gonna go see entertainment. They're gonna wanna they're gonna want that human connection that they're not getting in the office or getting through work. I think Sean just made a point that doesn't get enough airtime in the AI and jobs conversation.

If automation

does displace a significant amount of work,

people are going to need somewhere to put their time and

their money and

their need for human connection.

And I think live performance,

art, entertainment,

those things become more valuable,

not less.

So the human touch doesn't disappear in the world of automation.

It might actually become the thing people seek out the most.

So in that case, Sean's lovely daughter might be onto something.

I think that is plausible. Right? I do agree. Yeah. I think it just depends how long it's gonna take. Yeah.

Right. Exactly. Like, will it will it take five years, ten years? Who knows? But I agree that I think it's coming at at at some level.

So I I don't wanna downplay that. I don't think it's gonna cause a lot of layoffs. It already has. Look at Amazon. Amazon just came out and said that they now just hit a million robots in their warehouses. A million robots in their warehouses.

Like Yeah. That was like Awesome.

Four or five months ago, they hit a million.

Yeah. Yeah. I I just heard it. This this last Well, I think it was a million Amazon wide, and now they're saying it's a million just in warehouses

because that doesn't count the other shipping. And I grew up when I was very young

in a resource town, a coal mining town.

And everyone I knew's parents worked at the coal mine,

driving the coal truck or driving the forklift or whatever. Right? Yeah. All of that is automated.

They're Yeah. All the cool trucks are automatic.

Most of the equipment, heavy equipment is automatic.

You know, the trains and stuff, I don't even know if they have people on them anymore. I mean, it's just it's a different world now. And I think it's very difficult for people

to kind of see the forest from the trees

because in your life, maybe nothing's automated.

But that does not mean that

automation has not taken over a lot of the world, and a lot of that is going to be even more quickly automated as

robotics,

automation, and AI come together.

Yeah. The robotics thing is really interesting to me. I do think

that in the next five to ten years, we'll all have robots in our home doing chores. I mean, I I believe that personally.

I'm already angry I don't have one.

Oh my god. Throw away for the cost. They're just not they're not like it's not even a costing right now. It's so close to being capable enough

to make it worth spending the money. But,

also,

my family really needs a new car

versus a robot.

I'm like,

Wasn't I useful.

Definitely,

I'm on board of getting a robot. Sean, I wish we could talk all day, but we do have to cut it off at some point. Yeah. If somebody can wants to reach out and talk to you, where's the best place for them to that?

You can always look me up on LinkedIn. Sean Sweeney, s e a n,

Sweeney with the e at the end, s o o e e n e y. And that's a wrap on part two. And honestly,

one of the most honest conversations

about where advertising,

AI, and the future of work are actually headed.

If there's one thing to take away from this for everyone who's joined us today is that the shift is real

and it's already happening.

And the people who are preparing right now are going to be in a very different position

to those who aren't. And I think that's inevitable.

So go connect with Sean on LinkedIn for updates. The link is in the show notes. Make sure you've got the part one if you haven't already. Follow the show, and I and Matt are going to see you in the next one.