Coca-Cola’s AI Holiday Ad Revives a Classic—and Debate

Coca-Cola’s AI-generated holiday commercial revives the imagery of its classic “Holidays Are Coming” campaign, but its use of artificial intelligence has also renewed debate about creativity, jobs, and what audiences expect from an iconic brand. The ad’s familiar red trucks and seasonal message aim for nostalgia; the controversy is less about the story than about how it was made.

The classic campaign behind the new ad

“Holidays Are Coming” is Coca-Cola’s long-running Christmas advertising platform, built around a convoy of illuminated red delivery trucks traveling through winter landscapes. The campaign’s imagery has become closely associated with the approach of the holiday season for many viewers. Its appeal depends on repetition: the trucks, music, lights, and communal sense of anticipation are recognizable even when a particular year’s commercial changes.

The recent AI-made version draws on that visual vocabulary rather than introducing a wholly new holiday concept. That choice makes the ad easy to identify as Coca-Cola, while also inviting a direct comparison with earlier commercials and the human production teams behind them. It is a revival of a familiar advertising idea, not a return to an untouched original film.

How artificial intelligence was used

The commercial was produced with generative AI tools as part of an advertising production process. Generative systems can create or modify images and video from prompts, reference material, and other inputs. For a polished campaign, the work can involve repeated generation, selection, editing, compositing, and review rather than one prompt producing a finished commercial at once.

That distinction matters because “made with AI” does not necessarily mean “made without people.” People still make decisions about the concept, prompts, visual references, which results to keep, how to edit them, and whether the finished work meets a client’s requirements. At the same time, using software to generate footage can change which production tasks are needed and how much conventional filming or animation takes place.

The exact mix of tools and human labor can vary from one campaign to another. Unless a company or production team provides a detailed account, viewers should be cautious about claims that a particular commercial was generated entirely by a machine or, conversely, that AI played only a trivial role.

Why the commercial raised questions

The response reflects a broader disagreement about generative AI in creative industries. Some viewers see it as a practical tool that can help create elaborate images more quickly or make certain kinds of production accessible to smaller teams. Others worry that companies may use it to reduce paid work for artists, animators, camera crews, and other specialists—or that it may draw on creative work without adequate permission or compensation.

There are also questions about quality and trust. AI-generated images can look striking, but may contain inconsistencies or a synthetic look that audiences notice. In a campaign built on warm, familiar holiday imagery, even small visual oddities can distract from the intended emotion. And because Coca-Cola’s advertising has a recognizable history, some viewers judge the new work not only as a standalone commercial but against the craftsmanship and memories associated with earlier versions.

• Creative labor: Which roles were replaced, changed, or added by the production process?
• Consent and credit: What source material informed the tools, and how are artists’ contributions acknowledged?
• Disclosure: Should audiences be told clearly when generative AI contributes to an advertisement?
• Brand fit: Does the technology support the feeling of the campaign, or draw attention away from it?

These are questions about industry practice as much as about one commercial. The ad itself cannot establish how AI will affect employment or settle disputes about training data, which depend on the tools, contracts, and production arrangements involved.

Nostalgia, originality, and audience expectations

Reviving a classic campaign is not the same as recreating a specific older commercial frame for frame. Advertisers often retain a recognizable theme while changing the story, visuals, or production methods. In this case, familiarity is part of the pitch: audiences know what the trucks signify, so a new execution can quickly evoke the season.

That familiarity also raises the bar. When a brand draws on a beloved visual tradition, audiences may expect care and continuity. If the new version feels less expressive or more mechanically assembled, the contrast becomes part of the conversation. If it succeeds emotionally, some viewers may regard the method as secondary. Reactions therefore differ even among people who agree on what the ad depicts.

It is also useful to separate two claims that are sometimes conflated: that the commercial uses AI, and that it is therefore either wholly effortless or inherently inferior. Neither conclusion follows automatically. Production quality, originality, working conditions, and audience response require separate evidence and judgment.

What the controversy can—and cannot—tell us

A high-profile commercial offers a visible example of a company experimenting with generative tools, but it is not a reliable measure of AI’s effects across the entire creative economy. One campaign does not reveal how many workers were involved, what each person did, what compensation arrangements applied, or whether the production would otherwise have used live action, animation, or another method.

Those details require credible statements from the company or production team. Viewers can still assess the finished work and ask whether the campaign communicates honestly, but broad claims about job losses or the legal status of AI-generated material should not be inferred from the visuals alone. The more useful discussion is specific: what was generated, what people contributed, and how the company accounts for that process.

For viewers, the ad’s reception highlights a genuine tension. Familiar holiday branding depends on emotional connection and human associations, while generative AI can make production processes less visible. Whether audiences accept that combination may depend on the quality of the result, the transparency of the company, and the treatment of the people whose creative work informs the industry.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Coca-Cola’s holiday commercial made with AI?
The much-discussed version was produced using generative AI tools. That does not mean no people were involved: concept development, selection, editing, and other production decisions can remain human work.

Is it the same as the original “Holidays Are Coming” ad?
No. It revives the campaign’s familiar holiday-truck imagery, but a new execution is not the same thing as an exact restoration or frame-by-frame copy of an earlier commercial.

Why are people criticizing the ad?
Some viewers object to AI’s potential effects on creative jobs, questions about the use of artists’ work, or the look of the finished images. Others dislike the commercial on aesthetic grounds or feel it does not match the campaign’s nostalgic appeal.

Does using AI mean the commercial had no human creators?
No. AI can generate or alter material within a larger production. The tool’s use alone does not identify who conceived, directed, edited, reviewed, or approved the final advertisement.

Does this ad prove AI is replacing advertising workers?
No. A single campaign cannot establish industry-wide employment effects. That would require broader evidence about production budgets, staffing, roles, and changes over time.

What is the main debate about Coca-Cola’s AI holiday ad?
It is whether a brand can use generative AI to renew a cherished campaign without weakening its human character, obscuring creative contributions, or worsening concerns about work and consent.

Related

• 700 TOPS for On-Device AI: What It Really Means
• Intelligence, IQ and AI: Why Ability Is a Spectrum
• Panasonic NN-ST64JWQPQ: Power, Features and Fit