I keep seeing people blame Meta's AI optimisations for destroying campaign performance. But let's run a quick A/B test on that assumption. Hypothesis A: Meta deliberately sabotages advertisers. Hypothesis B: we're feeding it garbage data and expecting gold.
Meta makes money when we make money - if everyone loses, their ad revenue dries up. So why would they build a system that kills performance? The more likely culprit is that so many of us still try to control campaigns like it's 2018. Heatmaps and click-through rates tell me the platform's moved to an automated, data-driven model. If you're still micromanaging bids and placements, you're fighting the algorithm, not working with it.
I've seen it first-hand: strong creatives with clear signals outperform weak ones every time, AI or no AI. The real question isn't whether to turn AI off - it's whether we've bothered to feed it the right data, audience signals, and ad formats in the first place. Someone in another thread called it a casino, and yeah, it can feel that way. But maybe the house always wins because we keep betting on bad cards.
