By Elena Vasquez

Marketers hesitate to adopt artificial intelligence for influencer and connected TV (CTV) advertising, according to a headline finding from Glossy+ Research published on glossy.co.

The trade publication's research arm has put the conclusion at the top of its latest piece, signaling that two high-spend channels have not absorbed AI tools at the pace seen elsewhere in digital advertising. The finding matters for agencies, brands, and ad-tech vendors selling automation into creator marketing and streaming-video workflows.

Glossy+ operates as the paid research tier of Glossy, a publication covering fashion, beauty, and retail marketing. Its parent outlet built coverage around influencer work, which gives the AI-hesitation angle direct relevance to its readership.

What does the hesitation cover?

The headline identifies two channels where marketers have not embraced AI:

• Influencer marketing — a creator-driven category built on brand fit, audience vetting, and campaign execution
• Connected TV (CTV) — a programmatic video channel that has absorbed ad budgets as audiences shift away from traditional pay-TV

Both channels sit on top of significant ad spend. Influencer marketing operates at scale across beauty, fashion, and lifestyle verticals. CTV ad revenue has climbed steadily as streaming platforms replace linear TV viewing.

Both channels also share a feature that resists easy automation. Each depends on trust signals that are hard to model. Influencer marketing runs on perceived authenticity and creator-audience fit. CTV operates in a premium video environment where brand-safety mistakes carry high costs.

How does this map against the wider ad-tech picture?

The hesitation arrives against a backdrop of rapid AI adoption in adjacent digital ad channels. Search, social feeds, and display have all seen AI move from experiment to default in many agency buying stacks. The two channels Glossy+ names operate on different rails. Influencer work leans on talent relationships. CTV leans on premium video inventory and audience guarantees.

That structural difference likely explains the slower AI sweep through these lanes. Vendors selling automation into them face longer evaluation cycles, more conservative buyers, and a higher cost of brand-safety failure.

Why does the finding matter for operators?

For trade-press readers, the headline carries weight because both channels have drawn heavy AI vendor activity in recent quarters. Tools for creator discovery, fake-follower detection, and campaign attribution have proliferated. CTV-focused AI plays in audience targeting and creative optimization have also drawn investment.

A headline-level signal of marketer hesitation implies that automation vendors face a longer sales cycle in these lanes. The work still leans on human judgment, brand-safety review, and direct relationships with creators.

What does the headline leave out?

The headline does not carry the underlying survey data. Operators looking for specifics should note what is not in the published headline:

• Survey size and respondent mix
• Percentage of marketers reporting hesitation
• Direct quotations from brand or agency respondents
• Comparison data against other ad channels

These details typically surface in the full report rather than the headline alone.

What's the practical read?

Glossy+ Research tells operators that the AI rollout in influencer and CTV is not a straight line. Marketers still want humans involved in creator selection and streaming-video placement.

The headline gives operators a starting point. The full report, when it lands, will reveal whether the hesitation reflects active rejection or simple caution in pilot phases. Either reading has commercial implications for the automation vendors active in both channels.

The bottom line: two ad channels built on relationships and brand fit are not yielding to automation as quickly as the broader digital ad stack.