In this monologue, the speaker challenges the dismissive use of the term "AI slop" to describe rough, AI‑generated user‑generated content (UGC). He argues that such content functions like illustrative storytelling, where audiences willingly suspend disbelief, much like early CGI in movies (e.g., Terminator 2, Toy Story) or fantastical TV shows. The speaker defines AI slop as non‑factual, often visually imperfect AI‑generated scripts or videos that nevertheless convey a plausible scenario. He provides concrete marketing evidence: AI‑generated ads with obvious errors (e.g., six‑fingered hands) generate far higher conversion rates and lower cost‑per‑application than meticulously crafted, on‑brand assets (e.g., a funnel delivering $100 applications for a $25 k program versus $600 CPA for a traditional funnel). He frames criticism of AI slop as generational resistance, likening it to early backlash against Photoshop or Canva. The core claim is that performance, not polish, should dictate content strategy; if an ugly or factually loose AI piece drives results, it is superior. The speaker concludes by urging marketers to embrace AI trends rather than cling to outdated standards.
Chapters
I see a lot of people talk about the term AI slop as a way of like speaking down to, but I believe that people that use the term AI slop are the people that are really missing the boat and missing the opportunity. So I'll give you an example. If we go to movies that were in the '80s or the early '90s, think like Terminator 2, there was clearly good enough, but looking back, pretty bad computer-generated graphics. If you look at computer games from the '90s and the early 2000s, they were pretty bad computer-generated graphics. If you look at Toy Story from Pixar or the first Iron Man, it's pretty bad CGI. Maybe it was good for the time, but look back, you go like, oh, that's pretty rough, right? There are movies today like Black Panther where the last like 10 minutes you're like, oh, this is gross. This is not good at all. Like visually, it doesn't appeal and there's something clearly like wrong with it. But the whole purpose of that computer-generated imagery is to be illustrative or represent something. So for example, if you watch Independence Day, you can see those alien UFO saucers and they're shooting these like lasers or something like that. It's like horrifically unrealistic. And it just looks bad. Like, there are no light beams that travel slower than light, right? And then you're like, oh, but it's a bolt. And like, you have this like justification and it just looks bad. It's unrealistic, right? Even the original Star Wars, you're like, oh, that looks horrible. Right. I'll tell you what, the people saying that are the same people that don't realize that it's supposed to represent something. Those are the people that argue that the play itself was not realistic enough to fool them, forgetting that the whole purpose of movies is to abandon your sense of realism. As such is the same with how you would describe AI slop. And so what do I mean by AI slop? If you go to TikTok or most of the YouTube Shorts, you can see these ChatGPT scripts tied with a Higgsfield or Seed Dance video, And they divide into 9 different parts. And it's clearly wrong. It's incorrect. It's non-factual. It's just AI stuff about the Roman Empire or how people were treated in the 1900s or what would happen if you grew up in 1300s England or something like that. It's clearly incorrect, but it represents or is illustrative of what could happen. The people that watch this Are very much aware of the fact that it is not real. They are much aware of the fact that it is close, but no cigar. They are very much aware of the fact that this is not what actually truly deeply happened. It is a story, and the people who watch this understand it. Just like kids will watch a movie and they're like, oh wow, look, they traveled to the Antarctic and all they're wearing is a sweater. Oh my God. And like an adult is like, There's no way that would work. They need more sweaters than that. And like, you're missing the whole point. Very clearly missing the point. You can, by the way, watch any kids' Disney cartoon and be so horrifically offended about the unrealistic nature of it. You can watch Friends, the TV show, and go like, how the hell did Rachel and Monica afford an apartment like that? You can cast your own Forced realism onto storied events, and no matter what, you're going to be disappointed in it, and you're going to say something like, I can't believe this is happening, there's no way that could happen, blah blah blah. This happens a lot, by the way, with engineers that watch anything in the Marvel Universe. Like, Tony Stark should have died 18 times in that fucking suit, there's no fucking way he could ever do that because the G-forces, blah blah blah. It's a story. You have to suspend your disbelief. As such is the same with what you would call AI slop or AI UGC. It is representative or illustrative of a story or situation, and everybody watching it understands that it is not the true and complete truth. It is a direction. It is a generality. And I believe that the people who use the term AI slop, whether it is in a disparaging nature or it is in a descriptive nature, I think what they are doing is they are missing the fact that AI slop outperforms everything you have ever done up to this point in your career. I'll say it again. AI slop is outperforming everything you have done up to this point in your career and likely everything you will do in your career if you don't use AI slop. It is wild the amount of impact an AI-based script, AI-based videos, even if it is incorrect, even if it is non-factual, Even if it is only a little bit true, it is wild the amount of impact and its outsized returns and its massive inflection point on effort is having in the modern-day marketplace. There's not a single person in the world that believes the— if you wake up in 5000 BC Egypt, what would your life be like? Nobody believes that to be 100% true. It is just an interesting discussion point. It is the modern-day version of storytelling. Just like those very old German fairy tales of like, shit, what is it where you're walking through, Hansel and Gretel, that kind of stuff? Nobody believes that there's a house made out of candy. Am I mixing them up? You know what I'm trying to say, right? Nobody believes that to be true except the one guy who was sitting there super old, just pissed off like, there's no way this could happen. It's just unrealistic. It's not true. It's not possible. So many things would've gone wrong. It would've rained that day. Like that type of individual. The people saying AI slop are those people just kind of casting a curmudgeon onto interesting and well-done stories. And I'll say it again, AI slop is outperforming everything you've ever made in your career by a large margin. It is the equivalent to illustrators hired by Disney that used to illustrate by hand. And getting super pissed that computer-generated images are better, faster, stronger, and doing more effective work. And it's just like, oh, this is horrible. It's the same exact thing repeating again. What's even more interesting, by the way, from the KPI side of all this, my best performing ads are considered AI slop. I'll say it again. My best performing ads are considered AI slop. I have AI talking UGC heads that are 60 seconds long, that very clearly are AI UGC, that have the 6 fingers on the hand, that kind of thing. Or there's some graphical error or some unrealistic situation, and they are wildly outperforming anything that a client would say is realistic or honest or on brand. I have a funnel that is generating $100 applications For a $25,000 a year program. And it is wildly effective and it is beating the realistic, on-brand, honest, truthful, representative funnel that is generating $600 cost per applications for the same $25,000 program. Right. The people that are saying this is AI slop are the people that are old. And frustrated with the fact that their stuff no longer works. And they had their equivalent, by the way. When they were using Canva, the Photoshop people were saying, oh, you're cheating. And the Photoshop people were being told that they were cheating by the people beforehand, and the people beforehand, and the people beforehand. So when I see people commenting AI slop or clients saying AI slop, There's 2 categories of thought. One, which is I take constructive criticism like a gunshot in the chest. I should put that on a shirt. I saw that on a thread. I was like, that is fantastic, right? So that's one line of thinking. But the other line of thinking is AI slop is only slop if it does not perform. So if you have a quote unquote bad landing page that has a typo, that is your best performing landing page, guess what? It works, right? If you have an ad that is funky and ugly and is your best performing ad, guess what? It works. And I'll have clients say that this ad is ugly and we shouldn't do it, but they go, hmm, well, we're generating $150 cost per booked calls that show up, so we're gonna keep it. The same line of thinking applies to what people now use the term AI Slob. So it's just my conjecture and my hypothesis and my ranting. But I will tell you that the people that use the word AI slop are the equivalent of the grandparents taking their kids to go watch Toy Story and then saying it's unrealistic to have toys talking while the people are gone. And I go, yeah, that's the point. It is the suspension of belief. So when I, being the grandparent, watch TikToks with AI slop meant for children, it's very easy for me to take the same stance of like, oh, that's not realistic. They didn't research this. They didn't blah, blah, blah. You can get angry all you want, dude. There's 10 million views on that fucking video, right? And you're just pissed that your realistic video that you did all this research in, that is properly cited according to your mental model that you've been trained in and is honest and the best work you've ever done only got 100 views. And so it's very easy to tear down that castle instead of rebuilding your own. But I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are grandparents, to use that as an example, go wildly viral on TikTok because they just adopt trends. And there are plenty of people that refuse to adopt trends and be part of the next generation that are just all sorts of pissed off and demotivated by the fact that their skill sets are no longer valued in the marketplace. So I'll leave this video with the following summation. If there is a typo in your ad or a typo on your landing page, or if your ad is ugly and your landing page is ugly, but it is performing, then it is beating and it is better than your pretty design and your pretty landing page. End of discussion. As such, if you have AI slop and it is outperforming your hard-earned, properly calibrated, beautiful, colorly balanced landing page, well, that's it. See you later. Bye.
