CHATGPT: ChatGPT is a large language model chatbot, where the bot performs the task of predicting the next word in a series of words. The AI innovation was developed by OpenAI (who also created Dall-E) and it has gained quick popularity, thanks to its ability to answer complex questions conversationally, and learn from each interaction. How did we use it? We looked at ChatGPT to develop strategy, copy and scripting for THINKHOUSE content. This was the first machine involved, and the last. We began dialogue with the application, requesting it to build us a strategy for a Thinkhouse social media brief - after some back and forth, ChatGPT’s recommendation was to create a video containing very specific imagery. Once we had worked with Stable Diffusion and Midjourney, we returned to ChatGPT video scripting (as it had included a voice over element to the content in its recommendations) and for the post copy. The Benefits: - Knowledge: ChatGPT lowers the experience-level needed for developing social strategy, if it were to be used as a basis, young marketeers or students could employ the machine to help them create the bones of a plan. Since it’s learning off of research available online, this knowledge becomes more accessible, especially useful for those without access to entire teams of varying experience.
- Copy: It’s not without its faults, but in general, the copy given by the machine isn’t terrible. We found with a broad brief - ChatGPT could create simple, standard copy that in an agency setting could provide great thought starters for more developed, professional copy. This suggests that it could also be used as a brainstorm thought starter.
- Time-Efficiency: A common thread in the AI bots we used, ChatGPT provided us with an entire strategy, video concept, copy and script within an hour of work. Traditionally, this would be done by entire teams as well, ChatGPT is a one-man show.
The Limitations - Tone of Voice: For brand work, we’re going to see some less than stellar tonal shifts. For example, ChatGPT has a poor handle on youth-oriented language, when prompted it gave outdated language that could be defined as cringey “e.g rock on, client service legends' '. This doesn’t work for any brand that wants to speak to a young audience.
- Quality: Though the bot addressed the brief in record-time, the standard of its outputs was poor. Hence why we chose to move away from the original concept. There was a lack of innovation in its suggestion, as the machine is only concerned with ticking the boxes it has been prompted in the most logical way. We also have some concerns over its repeated use of “savage” as an irish slang term in its copy, which isn’t particularly politically correct. Overall, the product the traditional team produced was a more informed, creative piece of work, and was blatantly of a higher quality.
|