‘I made this ad in 60 minutes for $50’ - and other dangerous myths the C-suite shouldn’t buy

AI is opening the door to more creativity, but beware of opportunistic overhyping.

LinkedIn is awash with creators declaring: “I made this ad in 60 minutes for $50.”

It’s seductive, fast, cheap, revolutionary, and entirely misleading.

For leaders already under pressure to deliver more with less, it’s easy to see the appeal. If production really is this simple, what’s left for agencies, producers and strategists to justify? But these viral demonstrations, while impressive, have little to do with the reality of creating a compliant, on-brand and effective piece of advertising.

They’re the digital equivalent of a magician’s flourish, showing only the trick and never the years of craft, context and constraint behind it.

And that misunderstanding is now setting dangerous expectations in boardrooms everywhere.

The illusion of instant production

Yes, AI has transformed production. Generative tools can now create stills, music, voiceovers and motion content faster than ever. The promise of democratised creativity is real.

But the notion that a viable, client-ready ad can be made in minutes for pocket change is a fantasy. It risks eroding not only the perceived value of the creative process but also the integrity of brands themselves.

What these “I made this in an hour” posts skip over is everything that sits between an idea and an ad: compliance, brand alignment, tone of voice, accuracy, claims substantiation and the human judgment that keeps brands out of court and in consumers’ good graces.

In the rush to celebrate what AI can do, we’re forgetting what advertising must do. It must communicate clearly, truthfully and distinctively in market.

Process still matters, perhaps more than ever.

While AI accelerates tasks, it doesn’t replace process. In fact, the quality of the process determines whether the output is usable at all.

Three lessons stand out, and they are just a glimpse into a much broader set of considerations that separate a viral demo from a viable campaign.

1. You can’t skip pre-visualisation

Generating storyboards or stills before moving into video production isn’t a creative indulgence; it’s a cost-saving measure. AI video generation consumes computer credits and rendering time, and often produces inconsistent or unpredictable results from text-only prompts. Locking down imagery upfront reduces waste and gives clients clarity on what they are approving.

2. Casting still counts, even if it’s virtual

AI can generate a thousand “faces”, but casting remains essential. Clients need confidence that on-screen talent aligns with brand representation, demographic accuracy and cultural nuance. AI casting tools can help, but without human oversight they can quickly veer into ethical grey areas or misrepresent diversity.

3. Legal isn’t optional

The legal department isn’t a production bottleneck; it’s a safeguard. Whether it’s ensuring products aren’t misrepresented or confirming all claims meet regulatory standards, legal input is critical. AI can hallucinate, interpolate and fabricate. If brands don’t embed review checkpoints, the risk of misleading consumers and regulators rises sharply.

These three areas are only a fraction of what’s involved. Each layer of process, from data sourcing and consent tracking to sound design, voice synthesis, localisation and bias auditing, demands discipline, collaboration and time. The efficiencies come not from cutting corners but from structuring those processes intelligently.

Why the C-suite must get real about AI expectations

Executives love the idea of efficiency. But efficiency without accuracy, compliance and brand consistency is a false economy. The danger lies not in the tools themselves but in the narrative surrounding them, a narrative that encourages leaders to confuse “generation” with “production”.

An AI model can generate infinite variations of an image, but it can’t determine whether that image fits your brand guidelines, product reality or advertising code. That’s the domain of structured process, cross-functional collaboration and human judgment, all of which take time and cost money.

If leadership starts to expect full campaign production in under an hour, agencies and internal teams will inevitably cut corners. The result is faster content, weaker strategy and higher risk.

The smart C-suites aren’t asking “how fast can we make it”, they’re asking “how can AI make us more consistent, more adaptive and more creative without compromising our standards?”

The road ahead: recalibrating expectations

AI is not the end of production. It’s the evolution of it. The next frontier in advertising is not about removing humans from the process but redefining where they add the most value, in creative direction, strategy, brand governance and ethical oversight.

The industry doesn’t need to fear AI, but it does need to challenge the mythology around it. “I made this in 60 minutes for $50” isn’t innovation; it’s misinformation. And unless the C-suite understands the distinction, brands risk being seduced by the promise of speed and blindsided by the cost of shortcuts.

Advertising has always balanced art, science and responsibility. AI doesn’t change that; it simply raises the stakes. The tools are astonishing, but without the right process, governance and creative rigour, they produce nothing more than content-shaped noise.

The future of AI advertising won’t be written by those chasing speed. It will be led by those who build frameworks that make AI both useful and trustworthy.

Marty Hungerford is founding partner and chief innovation officer at BRX