AI is not the villain, the demand for ‘virality’ is

Let me start this piece with a fact. AI can definitely write faster than any copywriter. It can search the internet and even research more efficiently than any copywriter. But can it write like a copywriter? Not sure.

I am a copywriter. I write words, tell stories, and connect with people through my copy. AI’s potential to generate passable prose is undeniable, but it is not the sentient robot I fear.  Let’s be clear. AI isn’t coming for my job. It is our penchant for turning every brand into a hyper-relatable, meme-spewing, trend-hopping enigma, that is the main problem.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not a purist. I understand the need to adapt. But the relentless pursuit of virality is warping our collective imaginations. We are being conditioned to expect, and even demand, the absurd, the sensational, the instantly digestible. Substance, depth, and genuine connection are being replaced by the rush of a trend.

In the age of social media, attention is apparently the only currency that matters. Every day, brands, creators, and even legacy institutions contort themselves into increasingly absurd shapes to appease the algorithms. The result? A landscape littered with clickbait, cringe, and hollow content that prioritises shock over substance, speed over strategy, and virality over value.

We can see this shift unfold in real time. The erosion of storytelling, the commodification of human emotion, and the suffocation of meaningful communication. While debates rage about AI replacing creative jobs, the greater threat lies in how algorithms are reshaping what we create, and in doing so, warping our shared cultural DNA.

Social media platforms are not neutral spaces. They are businesses which operate to increase profit. They are engineered to maximize engagement at all costs, rewarding content that triggers rapid emotional reactions, while punishing nuance, depth or even an iota of intelligence. The algorithm doesn’t care if a video is profound or just profoundly stupid; it only cares if you watch it long enough to see an ad. This has created a perverse incentive structure where ‘viral potential’ trumps brand integrity or creative vision.

The pressure to ‘go viral’ has turned creativity into a factory line. Teams are forced to churn out content at breakneck speeds, optimising every frame, caption, and hashtag for maximum algorithmic appeal. In advertising, this has led to a dangerous shift: briefs that once asked for brand-building storytelling now demand merely thumb-stopping, scroll-worthy moments.

But here’s the paradox. While viral content can generate fleeting spikes in metrics, it rarely builds lasting brand affinity. A meme might earn a million likes, but does it make anyone care about the product? We have all seen campaigns balloon in reach while brand recall flatlines. Audiences are becoming adept at sniffing out desperation and seeing the difference between a brand that has something to say and one that’s just screaming for attention.

Worse, this race to the bottom is devaluing creative labour. When the goal is simply to make noise, originality becomes expendable. Why invest in an idea when you can slap a trending audio track on a generic video and call it a day? The relentless pressure to constantly generate viral hits takes a toll on the individuals tasked with creating this content. Writers are experiencing burnout as they navigate the demands of perpetually chasing trends and optimising for algorithms. It leaves little room for thoughtful development, in-depth research, or the cultivation of a unique creative voice.

The pressure to conform to viral formulas and cater to the ever-shifting whims of online audiences can lead to a profound loss of authenticity. This desperate pursuit of virality is leaving both the creator and the audience with a less fulfilling and ultimately less impactful digital landscape.

While AI is often framed as a job-stealing villain, its subtler role in this crisis is more alarming. Tools like ChatGPT and generative video platforms are increasingly used not to enhance creativity but to streamline the production of ‘good enough’ content that checks algorithmic boxes. Prompt engineering rather than ideation becomes the goal and drowns out any authentic voice.

Another issue is also how AI entrenches the status quo. Machine learning models trained on existing viral content inevitably replicate its patterns, creating a loop that rewards formulaic tropes. Want a viral tweet? AI will tell you to use words like ‘secret’, ‘hack’, or ‘mind-blowing’. Need a trending video? The algorithm favours rapid cuts, exaggerated faces, and hyperbolic captions. Over time, this shapes not just content but taste, conditioning audiences to expect constant stimulation and discard anything requiring patience or thought.

The human cost of this is immense. Creative worth is reduced to views and shares rather than insight or imagination. We are raising a generation that thinks ‘likes’ equal value and mistakes shock for substance. We are trading the art of storytelling for the blunt force of clickbait. A recent study showed that short-form video consumption has increased significantly in the last five years but attention spans have shrunk by an average of four seconds? It is symptomatic of a problem.
Young professionals entering the industry conflate creativity with virality, and ultimately experience creative fatigue trying to reconcile artistic standards with the demands of the feed.

Many brands justify their viral obsession with a simple argument: ‘This is what the audience wants!’ But that cannot be true. Audiences don’t want cringe; they are trained to respond to it. There is a critical difference between giving people what they desire and feeding them what they have been conditioned to consume. The latter is a cheap sugar high—a hit of dopamine that fades as quickly as it arrives.

The real casualty here is trust. When brands prioritise gimmicks over genuine messaging, they erode consumer relationships. A 2024 study by Edelman found that 67% of consumers buy from brands they believe “share their values”. Yet, how can values shine through when content is designed to game an algorithm rather than resonate with humans? The answer is, they can’t.  Take, for example, food delivery apps like Swiggy and Zomato. Both are great at decoding virality, and in some sense, responsible for changing how brands approached social media. But ultimately, when one has to order food, there is no brand loyalty and the app giving the most discount on that particular day wins.

The crisis we face isn’t about lack of talent or ideas. It is about the system that conflates creativity with content production and confuses visibility with value. Algorithms are not inherently evil, but their unchecked influence is flattening culture into a never-ending scroll of sameness.

For brands, the way out is not to reject digital platforms but to reimagine how to use them. To create work that respects audiences enough to challenge them, to move them, and, even to bore them occasionally. Because in the quiet spaces between viral hits, that is where real connection lives. The alternative is a future where our collective imagination is held hostage by the cold logic of engagement metrics.

Virality is a vanity metric. Track trust. Recall. Emotional impact. After Apple’s ‘1984’ ad aired, Mac sales didn’t spike overnight, but the brand became synonymous with rebellion. Look at any Coca Cola ad from all over the world and the emotions and the sentiments will be the same. Or the all Nike ads—they have the same ethos of pushing the limits and finding strength.

So, the next time you hear anyone say, ‘Make it viral’, ask them what was the last trend they remember and how long did it trend for? On the other hand, what is the lifespan of a story that matters? Decades.

Write that story. The one that outlives trends, resists algorithms, and reminds us what it means to write. Let the robots handle the rest.