{"id":4431268,"date":"2026-04-21T16:03:23","date_gmt":"2026-04-21T14:03:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.deptagency.com\/insight\/ambassador-slop-why-good-advertising-still-needs-good-creative\/"},"modified":"2026-05-20T14:22:54","modified_gmt":"2026-05-20T12:22:54","slug":"ambassador-slop-why-good-advertising-still-needs-good-creative","status":"publish","type":"article","link":"https:\/\/www.deptagency.com\/en-uki\/insight\/ambassador-slop-why-good-advertising-still-needs-good-creative\/","title":{"rendered":"Ambassador slop: Why good advertising still needs good creative"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/mask><\/g><\/svg>\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tInsights\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n\tAmbassador slop: Why good advertising still needs good creative<\/h1>
\n\t\t\t\n\t\n\t
\n\t\tImogene Robinson\t\t
\n\t\tWriter\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tDate\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tApril 21, 2026\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\n<\/div>\n\n\n\tJust like AI, celebrity ambassadors are everywhere these days. And just as there is “AI slop”, there is “ambassador slop”.

And right now, the market is producing more of it than ever.<\/p>\n\tOver 25% of brands currently participating in the endorsement landscape entered it for the first time in the last 12 months<\/a>. CMOs, navigating an increasingly fragmented media landscape, are placing increasingly large bets on the one thing that still cuts through: A face everyone already knows. But what gets lost is the audience. Modern viewers are more media-literate than ever. And they are very good at recognising when they’re being pandered to.

The question facing every brand considering a celebrity deal isn’t whether to use an ambassador. It’s about whether they\u2019re building something that actually resonates<\/a> or just buying a face that audiences know.<\/p><\/div>\n\t\n\t<\/div>\n\n\n\tFame is a shortcut. That doesn’t mean it works.<\/h2>\n\tIt\u2019s a proven fact that celebrity endorsements can move product. Research led by Harvard Business School<\/a> found that a celebrity partnership increases a company’s sales by an average of 4% compared with its competitors.

But the mechanism behind that lift is more interesting (and more conditional) than it seems. One study tracking eye movement and pupil dilation found that people fixate more on the famous face than the product<\/a> being advertised. Nevertheless, audiences will still purchase these products faster and with greater confidence.

That’s a powerful cognitive shortcut. It’s also, if you’re not careful, a trap.

As ambassadorships have become more common, audiences have become more media-literate and more aware of the cognitive shortcut celebrity creates.
\u00a0
In a survey of 3,000 consumers, 81.8 % of respondents<\/a> reported that they perceive celebrity endorsements as lacking credibility. And another survey<\/a>, which cited the same issue, noted this response in particular:

\u201cPaid product endorsements are meaningless. I want to learn about the product from experts who are advocating for it, not just some random person who happens to have a job that makes them well-known\u201d.<\/em>

This is ambassador slop in its clearest form: Fame for the sake of fame. And while the result may move product in the short term, the approach can inflict long-term damage.<\/p><\/div>\n\t\n\t<\/div>\n\n\n\tWhat good ambassador partnerships actually look like<\/p>\n\tHow can you create an ambassador partnership that actually works? Below, we\u2019ve identified three key qualities that the best celebrity partnerships share, followed by examples of real-life partnerships that illustrate what to do (and what not to do) to put those qualities into action.<\/p><\/div>\n\t\n\t<\/div>\n\n\n\t\n\t\nMeaningful fit<\/h3>\n\nNot superficial category alignment, but genuine coherence between who the celebrity is and what the brand stands for, specific enough that the pairing feels inevitable in retrospect.\u00a0

Real fit isn’t a box to check in due diligence. It’s the foundation the entire creative case is built on. Without it, no amount of production value or media spend rescues the partnership from feeling like exactly what it is: a transaction.
<\/p>\n\nDON\u2019T: <\/strong>Kendall Jenner X Pepsi<\/strong><\/a>
Most of us probably remember the infamous public response to the 2017 Pepsi ad in which Kendall Jenner breaks the tension between a protest march and a group of police by handing one of the officers a can of Pepsi. The problem with the ad, which audiences caught on to right away, was a lack of fit.\u00a0

For the ad to work, Pepsi could have considered partnering with a real-life activist or charity. Jenner, by contrast, was a reality TV star and among the highest-paid celebrity influencers at the time. It\u2019s no wonder that the pairing of this reputation with the ad’s theme led audiences to perceive the whole thing as transactional.
<\/p>\n\nDO: Serena Williams X Ro<\/a><\/strong>
Through her partnership with Ro, Serena Williams publicly announced she was using GLP-1 injections to lose weight following the birth of her children. This was not only an incredibly vulnerable and brave decision, but it also spoke to the importance of Ro\u2019s product.\u00a0

Even for an athlete of Williams\u2019s calibre, diet and exercise simply weren\u2019t enough to regain control of her body. She needed the assistance of a GLP-1 like Ro\u2019s. And this simple fact served as the foundation for a partnership with meaning that went far beyond product sales.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t<\/div>\n\n\n\t\n\t\nCreative integration<\/h3>\n\nIf you remove the celebrity from the campaign, does the concept still work? If the creative still has tension, narrative, and a reason to exist without the famous face, then the celebrity was decoration.\u00a0

However, if the idea collapses without that specific person, if the whole thing only works because of who they are and what they specifically bring to it, then the celebrity is structural. That’s the only version of the deal worth making.<\/p>\n\nDON\u2019T: <\/strong>Jennifer Garner X Capital One<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0
Jennifer Garner has been featured as a celebrity ambassador in several Capital One ads. However, this one stands out for its attempt at a more creative integration by having Gardner parody Tom Hanks\u2019s character in a famous scene from \u201cA League of Their Own.\u201d

The problem in this example isn\u2019t lack of creativity, it\u2019s weak integration. Critics pointed out<\/a> that the connection between Capital One and the iconic baseball movie is unclear, made even more so by the fact that Garner wasn\u2019t in that film in the first place. As a result, the final ad just feels, well, sloppy. Like anyone (let alone a famous actress with her own roster of iconic roles) could have taken on the brief.
<\/p>\n\nDO: <\/strong>Michael Cera X CeraVe<\/strong><\/a>
Apart from sharing (almost) the same name, Cera wasn\u2019t exactly an obvious ambassador choice for a product category like skincare. While most skincare commercials focus on using natural beauty to stand out, Cera\u2019s reputation was built on understated, awkward roles.

That\u2019s where the true creativity of Cera\u2019s integration came about. By leaning into Cera\u2019s unique reputation as the awkward, deadpan ‘everyman’ character, CeraVe\u2019s advert doubles down on this contrast in a way that\u2019s both hilarious and completely unique to Cera\u2019s identity.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t<\/div>\n\n\n\t\n\t\nClear narrative role<\/h3>\n\nA successful ambassador is not hired because they are famous. They are hired because they perform a specific strategic function. They make something possible that the brand could not have made possible alone.

A clear narrative role gives the celebrity something real to do<\/em> (a character to inhabit, a tension to carry, a purpose in an actual story) rather than simply a product to hold and a line to deliver. It\u2019s the difference between a celebrity as costume and a celebrity as character.
<\/p>\n\nDON\u2019T:<\/strong> Zo\u00eb Saldana X T-Mobile<\/strong><\/a>
Academy Award-winning actor Zo\u00eb Saldana\u2019s talent is undeniable. Yet, in this ad, she\u2019s given no narrative role. Without it, the ad becomes an example of the ‘hold the product and deliver a line’ type of celebrity partnership. Except, with no product to hold, the ad appears to overcompensate with sheer enthusiasm from a famous face. The final result was criticised by audiences for lack of substance<\/a>, with one describing it as \u201cencapsulating almost everything I hate about commercials these days\u201d.

<\/p>\n\nDO: <\/strong>Bradley Cooper & Matthew McConaughey X Uber Eats<\/strong><\/a>
Just like T-Mobile, Uber Eats also hired Academy Award-winning actors for their Super Bowl campaign<\/a>: Bradley Cooper and Matthew McConaughey. Unlike T-Mobile, however, Uber Eats embedded them in a serialised narrative arc that gave Cooper and McConaughey genuine dramatic function across multiple spots. They weren’t just decorating the brand. They were fulfilling established narrative roles that came together as a compelling (and comedic) feud.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t<\/div>\n\n\n\tFame is a raw material, not a finished product<\/h2>\n\tCelebrity ambassadorships come with a price tag in the tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars<\/a>. When that much of the budget is committed to a name before a single frame is shot, oftentimes the creative brief arrives already constrained. The idea has to work around the talent, not the other way around. In this way, slop isn\u2019t always a<\/em> choice. Sometimes it\u2019s the only<\/em> choice.

Of course, if the creative is good, celebrity ambassadorships can become something that makes sense, feels genuine, and offers a clever approach to traditional advertising. Something powerful enough to earn its place in culture\u2026 and earn back the cost of producing it.\u00a0

Ultimately, the difference between success and slop is proof that both fame and creativity can be hugely valuable to brands. One just has a bigger price.<\/p><\/div>\n\t\n\t<\/div>\n\n
\n\tON OUR MIND<\/span><\/h2>\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\n\t\t\t<\/picture>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\n\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t<\/svg>\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tInsight\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\t\t
    \n\t\t\t\t\n\t