Listen To The Show
Transcript
Welcome to The Brief by Kuro House, your daily dose of sharp marketing insights. Today, we’re diving deep into the most compelling stories shaking up the marketing and media world—from AI’s trust crisis and the rise of “liquid content,” to the very real challenges creators face with late payments, and how brands are navigating political turmoil. Let’s get you up to speed.
Our first story, from Digiday, examines how AI platforms are battling a wave of what’s being called “AI slop” and a growing trust problem among consumers. While AI adoption isn’t the issue—82% of advertising execs think Gen Z and millennials are positive about AI-generated ads, but only 45% of those consumers actually are. That’s a huge perception gap. To counteract this, tech giants like OpenAI and Meta are investing in Super Bowl-level advertising. OpenAI is returning to the Super Bowl after its 2025 debut, and Meta is promoting its Oakley AI glasses this year. Last year alone, Microsoft, Meta, Google, and others spent over $473 million advertising their AI offerings. The goal? Shift the narrative from suspicion to trust. But it’s not just about flashy ads—concerns over job loss, deepfakes, privacy, and even water usage at AI data centers are fueling skepticism. OpenAI’s recent move to introduce ads in ChatGPT, with promises of clear labeling, has drawn mixed reactions. Meanwhile, platforms like Pinterest and YouTube are cracking down on low-quality AI content, and major publishers are both suing and partnering with AI companies over copyright and revenue share. The IAB has released an AI Transparency and Disclosure Framework calling for clear labeling of AI in ads, including synthetic humans and digital twins. The bottom line: the next phase of the AI arms race is about trust as much as it is about dollars, and advertising is the vehicle to win over both consumers and marketers.
Switching gears, Modern Retail reports on a crisis hitting retailers and brands in Minnesota after a deadly ICE raid. The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, with signatures from CEOs at Target, Best Buy, General Mills, and Land O’Lakes, called for a “de-escalation of tensions” but stopped short of naming political leaders or directly condemning ICE. This soft approach has drawn criticism, especially after hundreds of Target workers wrote to leadership condemning the company’s “continued inaction” as ICE agents assaulted employees. The economic impact is severe—some restaurants and retailers report sales down 40-80%, and up to 700 businesses closed during a general strike in protest. The dilemma for brands is real: take a public stand and risk political backlash, or stay silent and risk alienating employees and customers. Experts like Lola Bakare, author of “Responsible Marketing,” argue that companies need to directly acknowledge harm and take a clear stance to build trust. Meanwhile, lower-level employees and other organizations, like the National Basketball Players Association, have been more vocal, explicitly naming victims and defending civil liberties. The lesson? In moments of national pain, brands have an opportunity—and perhaps a responsibility—to energize, inspire, and comfort their communities, or risk losing their trust.
Next, Digiday’s Future of TV Briefing exposes what it calls the creator economy’s “very loud, dirty little secret”—late and delayed payments from brands. While brands are pouring more money than ever into influencer marketing (a projected $43.9 billion in the U.S. this year), payment windows are stretching from the typical 30 days to 60, 90, or even 120 days after a campaign. And even then, payments are often late. Some creators are left unpaid when brands go bankrupt during the waiting period, and even blue-chip brands are dragging their feet. This isn’t a new issue—late payments have plagued the industry for years—but as the money involved grows, so does the problem. The lack of accountability means creators often bear the risk, even as their influence becomes more central to marketing strategies. The report also touches on the evolving definitions of “creator” versus “influencer,” the rise of programmatic TV advertising, and the ongoing turbulence at TikTok as it transitions to a U.S.-only algorithm, sparking concerns about engagement and content suppression. The takeaway: as the creator economy matures, brands need to step up and treat creators as true business partners, not just content factories.
Let’s talk about the future of content with another Digiday report on how publishers like Dow Jones, Business Insider, Forbes, and People Inc. are using AI in 2026. AI has moved from experimental to essential, with 93% of publishers now using it, up from 42% in 2022. Publishers are creating dedicated AI teams—Forbes has a 24-person “AI & Strategic Platforms Group,” The Washington Post has a chief AI officer, and Reuters has a newsroom AI editor. Most publishers use AI internally for tasks like voice-to-text translation, metadata tagging, and automating repetitive work. But more than a third now use AI for both internal and content creation purposes, such as audience-facing chatbots, personalized recommendations, and even custom AI-generated podcasts. For example, Dow Jones uses AI to translate articles into multiple languages, opening up new markets. Reuters uses AI to rough-edit videos, speeding up production. The New York Times uses AI to analyze vast datasets for investigative stories. While generative AI is favored for sales, creative production, and marketing, publishers remain cautious about using it for news writing, citing the risk of average, inaccurate content. Oversight and ethical standards are paramount, with many publishers establishing review committees to vet new AI tools and ensure they align with editorial values. The big shift? AI is freeing up human talent for higher-value editorial work while making content more personalized and efficient.
Finally, Digiday breaks down the buzzword “liquid content.” Thanks to generative AI, publishers are moving away from static articles toward content that can fluidly adapt into summaries, audio, video, or even interactive experiences—tailored in real time to the user’s context and preferences. The Reuters Institute describes liquid content as “stories that are not static but adapt in real time based on the viewer’s context, location, time, or interaction.” AI-powered browsers like Perplexity’s Comet and OpenAI’s Atlas already pull together personalized news briefings from across the web. The Washington Post’s recent experiment with a pick-your-own-format AI podcast is a prime example, letting users choose topics, hosts, and length for a custom experience—though it did face accuracy issues. The shift is profound: publishers are being urged to focus on structuring content as reusable knowledge rather than fixed documents, so it can flow into any format consumers want. The challenge is maintaining quality, accuracy, and brand control as content becomes more fluid and distributed. While some argue that publishers should focus on unique, high-quality journalism, others see liquid content as the key to staying relevant as consumers increasingly demand information “when they want it, how they want it.”
That’s a wrap for today’s Brief. The stories we covered show a marketing and media landscape in flux—where trust, accountability, and adaptability are more important than ever. Whether it’s AI platforms fighting for legitimacy, brands navigating social crises, creators demanding fair treatment, or publishers reinventing content for the AI age, one thing is clear: staying sharp means staying informed. Thanks for listening, and we’ll see you tomorrow for more insights that keep you ahead of the curve.
