Why Generative AI Hardly Appears in Creative Awards Yet

Over the past two years, generative AI has dominated almost every conversation in our industry. Agencies experiment with synthetic imagery, AI-written copy, automated video production, and virtual influencers. Conferences frame AI as the next creative revolution. LinkedIn sometimes feels like a permanent stream of prompt engineering.

So, I expected to see generative AI everywhere in the shortlisted work. But when the 2026 winners and shortlists were published on LoveTheWork, something interesting became apparent. Generative AI is almost invisible.

Among the campaigns currently listed, only a small number visibly rely on AI technologies at all. A handful involve computer vision, data modelling, or advanced sensing systems. But most of the work is driven by something much more familiar: human insight, cultural observation, and strong storytelling.

That gap between industry hype and creative recognition is worth examining.

Looking at the numbers

Based on a review of the visible shortlist pages, the picture becomes clearer.

Only about seven to nine campaigns appear to involve AI or advanced technology as part of the concept. That represents roughly six to eight percent of the visible shortlist.

Another five to ten projects rely on sophisticated data systems or algorithmic platforms, but do not explicitly highlight AI.

Campaigns that clearly rely on generative AI appear to be extremely rare, possibly only one or two entries.

In other words, roughly eighty-five to ninety percent of the shortlisted work appears to have no direct AI component at all.

For an industry that talks constantly about AI, that is a surprisingly small share. But it also reflects how generative AI is actually used inside agencies today.

Generative AI is mostly a production tool

Inside agencies, generative AI is already deeply embedded in everyday workflows.

Creative teams use it to generate visual ideas, draft copy, edit videos, or accelerate storyboarding. It allows teams to produce variations faster and lowers the cost of experimentation. But most of these uses happen behind the scenes. They improve efficiency, not necessarily creativity.

Creative juries evaluate ideas. They are not judging how quickly a campaign was produced or which tools were used to create it. A campaign that generates hundreds of AI images will not win an award if the concept itself is ordinary.

Generative AI can speed up execution, but it does not automatically produce originality.

Creative awards still reward ideas

Festivals such as the Spikes Asia Awards have always rewarded the same qualities: cultural insight, originality, and meaningful impact.

Technology alone does not create those things. Most generative AI outputs still depend heavily on human prompts and curation. Someone still needs to understand culture, behavior, and context. Someone still needs to shape the story.

This is why many of the most interesting projects in the shortlist use technology quietly in the background. It enables the solution, but it is not the headline.

When AI appears, it solves a real problem

The campaigns that do incorporate advanced technology tend to do so for a clear reason: the technology enables something genuinely useful.

One example from the shortlist is Vision Pulse: Sight Beyond Seeing, developed for Hyundai. The project uses sensing technology and computer vision to help visually impaired people interpret their surroundings through wearable feedback.

Another example is Smart Eye Camera by OUI Inc., which transforms smartphones into portable tools for eye diagnostics. The project demonstrates how imaging technology and AI-assisted diagnostics can make eye screening more accessible.

A third example is Waves of Will Powered by NTT, which translates human biometric signals into interactive visual experiences.

Similarly, Garuda Rakshak from DSP Mutual Funds uses advanced data systems to help protect investors from financial fraud.

These projects share something important. Technology is not there to impress people. It is there because it enables a meaningful outcome.

The question of authenticity

There is another reason generative AI appears rarely in award-winning work: authenticity.

Many creative categories increasingly value genuine stories and real-world impact, particularly in social impact campaigns or documentary storytelling. Synthetic media can complicate those narratives. AI-generated content raises questions about authenticity, manipulation, and authorship.

For agencies trying to tell powerful human stories, highlighting generative AI can sometimes distract from the message rather than strengthen it. In some cases, technology may even be deliberately kept in the background.

From AI campaigns to AI infrastructure

What I find most interesting about the shortlist is that it hints at a broader shift in our industry.

Instead of asking how AI can be showcased inside a campaign, creative teams are starting to ask a more useful question: what problems can technology solve?

Many of the most compelling projects increasingly look less like traditional advertising and more like tools, services, or platforms.  AI becomes part of the infrastructure behind those experiences rather than the central attraction.

Paradoxically, the more powerful AI becomes, the less visible it may appear in the final work.

What does this mean for marketing

The relatively small presence of generative AI in creative awards does not mean the technology is overhyped or irrelevant. If anything, it suggests the industry is beginning to move beyond the initial excitement and is learning how to use AI more meaningfully.

Rather than becoming the center of attention, AI is increasingly integrated into products, services, and experiences. It becomes part of the infrastructure behind ideas rather than the headline itself. As generating content becomes easier and faster, the real competitive advantage shifts elsewhere: to human insight, cultural understanding, and the ability to identify problems worth solving.

The projects that stand out, and that are most likely to gain recognition, are those where technology genuinely improves people’s lives or enables something that was not previously possible. In that sense, AI will win awards not because it produces content faster, but because it expands what people can do.

As I am preparing to attend the Spikes Asia Awards gala this Thursday, I find that insight rather reassuring. Despite all the excitement surrounding AI, the essence of creative marketing remains unchanged. It begins with curiosity about people, culture, and society. Technology can accelerate ideas and open new possibilities, but the spark that makes an idea meaningful still comes from human imagination.

Perhaps that is the most important lesson from this year’s shortlist: the tools are evolving quickly, but the foundation of creativity remains the same.

By Daniela La Marca, Editor-in-Chief, MediaBUZZ – AI in Marketing