Creativity Without Commercial Viability Is Just Noise
- Olivia Chiong
- Oct 7
- 4 min read
I recently attended an ad festival expecting to be challenged, inspired—even a little humbled. Instead, I walked out feeling like I’d sat through an echo chamber of people clapping at their own reflections. It was eye-opening—not in the way I’d hoped, but in a way that confirmed many of my doubts about the state of the creative industry.
What struck me most wasn’t the lack of creativity—it was the disconnect from reality. The work being celebrated felt less like problem-solving and more like performance art for fellow insiders.
Agencies today seem obsessed with pairing two unrelated ideas, stretching a flimsy thread between them, and desperately trying to make a campaign “work” by finding any hint of connection. The outcome? Ideas for the sake of ideas. And worse—ideas for the sake of publicity. The result is work that feels forced, nonsensical, and hollow.
We’ve lost the plot. We’ve forgotten that, at the end of the day, creativity in advertising isn’t just about art. It’s about effectiveness, business, strategy, and relevance. If a campaign can’t deliver results beyond stirring up reactions on Twitter, it isn’t good work—it’s just expensive noise.
There’s this glorification of absurdity that I saw over and over again. And I get it, “art is subjective.” But when everything becomes acceptable, then nothing is accountable. There’s no clear standards, just a free-for-all where absurdity is mistaken for brilliance. If the metric for success is simply attention, then of course the most disruptive, polarising campaigns win. But attention alone doesn’t pay the bills or grow the brand.
We’ve built a system where the same top agencies dominate year after year, pumping money into award shows and dictating what “great” looks like. It’s a monopoly. And it’s dangerous, because it means the bar is being set by those least affected by whether the work actually works.
To be honest, one of the talks I attended had points so generic it could’ve been generated by ChatGPT (no offense, but if I paid to be there, I’d like a little more substance). That’s how hollow it’s become.
What frustrates me even more is seeing young creatives in the audience, soaking it all in—chasing awards, trends, and validation, but not impact. They’re too inexperienced to see through the performance. They’re taught to appreciate art and be inspired by whatever’s presented, but without a critical lens. It’s easy to exploit that naivety. The best talents either burn out within a year or stay and slowly become part of the machine—chasing clout instead of creating work that matters. Eventually, they’re the ones clapping too.
One campaign that stirred controversy online was also featured during one of the talks. When questioned, the speaker simply said, “That’s the point of art—to stir reactions.” But if that’s the only benchmark now, what happens to campaigns that actually solve real problems? That connect meaningfully with people? That move the needle?
It made me ask: what really warrants the title of “iconic”?
I’ve always believed ideas are finite. Most things have been done before. So in an oversaturated industry, the easiest play left is to shout louder, even if there’s nothing to say. And that’s exactly what’s happening. It’s a spectacle now. A game of attention. Bad publicity is still publicity, right?
There’s no fixed standard for what’s considered “good” in this industry. Art is subjective—if anything goes, then everything goes. That’s not a reliable gauge. I’ve noticed that sometimes ideas get pushed forward just because they sound grand, but when you look closer, they’re either impractical or don’t solve the actual problem.
I think people forget that advertising, at its core, is a business. Creativity comes second—but as creatives, we often get distracted by the bling of awards and start treating them as the gold standard. A lot of young creatives come in wanting to make art that fulfils their passion. But the truth is, we’re here to meet a client’s needs. That doesn’t mean you can’t be creative—it just means your creativity has to serve a purpose.
Commercial viability matters. It’s not about selling out—it’s about making work that matters, that resonates and performs. Creativity should solve, not just shout. Elevate, not just echo. That’s the standard we should be fighting for.
The truth is, if the industry doesn’t realign itself with substance, purpose, and impact, we’ll keep spiralling into this circus of empty gestures dressed up as genius. And frankly, that’s a shitshow.
It’s not about ideas for the sake of ideas—it’s about making sure whatever you present has real commercial value.
On the other hand, creatives often complain that clients limit creativity. But advertising is a business, not an art gallery. From what I’ve seen, clients usually aren’t intentionally difficult—they just have deadlines and metrics to meet. And honestly, some passionate creatives themselves don't realise that they can be quite difficult to work with because they're either too busy chasing their own “creative vision”, or they're too emotionally invested in their work. Once you understand that, it becomes easier to align with clients and build better working relationships. I like to think it’s possible to bridge the gap between creative and strategy. There’s usually common ground, if both sides are reasonable. It just takes communication and good judgment to find it. I digress.
Anyways, the last eye-opening example I'd like to share was during a recent portfolio review. A senior creative from a well established agency was showing me examples of what “good work” looks like—a series of beautifully designed posters that captured a clear idea. I remember asking, “So how does this look in the real world? Is it an activation or something tangible?” (I genuinely asked because I was curious how it would reach the target audience)
He paused for a second and said, “No, it doesn’t exist.”
That moment stuck with me. It made me realise that a lot of “great ideas” in advertising only live on mockups and slides. They look amazing on paper, but they never actually make it out into the real world. It was a bit of an fml moment, but also an important one—a reminder that good ideas should live beyond the deck.
Anyway, that’s my little rant. See you in the next one.
