Consumers’ Interpretations of Anti-AI Marketing

Abstract

This study explores how consumers interpret and evaluate explicit and implicit forms of anti-AI marketing in increasingly AI-driven digital environments. As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly embedded in everyday life and digital media, brands have simultaneously begun to emphasize human presence, authenticity and visibly non-AI communication, creating a paradox between technological normalization and the growing symbolic value of human presence and imperfection. The study adopts an exploratory, qualitative and abductive research design with a consumer-centric perspective. Empirical data was collected through four focus groups, allowing for in-depth discussions of consumers’ interpretations and evaluations of anti-AI marketing. Drawing upon theories of symbolic value, disenchantment and re-enchantment, authenticity, The Handmade Effect, and The Persuasion Knowledge Model (PKM), the study examines how consumers interpret and evaluate the use of AI in marketing, and how they valorize explicit and implicit forms of anti-AI marketing. The findings demonstrate that consumers interpret AI differently depending on context, intention, and perceived effects on human effort and authenticity. While AI is widely accepted as a functional and efficient tool in everyday life, its use in marketing and visual communication often triggers skepticism, particularly when it appears to replace human creativity or reduce visible human involvement. AI in marketing is frequently interpreted as a signal of efficiency, automation, and shortcut-taking, which diminished perceptions of creativity, authenticity, and symbolic value, contributing to feelings of Disenchantment. In contrast, anti-AI associations, particularly those emphasizing imperfection, messiness, and visible human traces, are often perceived as more emotionally meaningful, relatable, and authentic. However, the findings also demonstrate that anti-AI marketing does not automatically function as a source of authenticity or re-enchantment. Explicit anti-AI claims could also be interpreted as strategic or performative, whereas more implicit anti-AI associations are more readily accepted as authentic. The study therefore contributes to existing research on symbolic value, authenticity, and re-enchantment by demonstrating how consumers actively negotiate the meanings of AI and anti-AI marketing rather than passively accepting such communication as inherently authentic.