LEAD 2026: Is advertising still leading, or being led?

I went to LEAD 2026 expecting clarity. Instead, I felt confusion.

It was the Advertising Association’s centenary. A room of senior leaders gathered under the banner of Leadership Through Trust, a theme suited to a moment where trust in politics, media and business is under strain. The opening tone was confident and celebratory. Advertising funds the things people value. It underpins the services we use daily, drives growth and strengthens the UK’s soft power. All valid.

Yet as the industry spoke about trust, the stage told a narrower story. No Black voices. No East Asian voices. Few women. In 2026. It is difficult to centre trust while narrowing who represents the industry, as cultural authority is shaped by who is visible and why they are there, as much as by what is said.

Unsurprisingly, the elephant in the room was AI. It hovered over the day with a quiet unease. In a landscape shaped by deepfakes, scams, synthetic imagery and low-quality (slop) content at scale, we were assured across multiple panels that safeguards are evolving for consumers and teams alike. Regulation through bodies like the ASA would ensure advertising remains responsible and trustworthy, which had confirmed consumer growth viability. Watermarking and disclosure would increase transparency and organisations are investing in policy and training around it. And, of course, AI will unlock efficiency and growth. Shock, I know.

The defining tension in these conversations was the framing of a trade-off between opportunity and responsibility. The tone was confident, yet the answers from leaders often felt cautious, avoiding the detail that would have addressed what unsettled the room. specifically, how AI innovation is being governed within organisations and whether the future of advertising being presented is as stable as it sounded. We discussed this leadership phenomena in a previous memo; referring to it as organisational lag, drag, and then blag. The ASA and assured tone were repeatedly cited as proof that standards remain intact. Yet with Google on the panel, it was clear that the tech company, part of the ecosystem, is operating on a different scale and speed of innovation. That raises a harder question. Is it truly within advertising’s control to hold search engines and tech companies to account to enhance trust, particularly when models are released and updated before their broader impact is understood?

Dr Daniel Hulme (Chief AI Officer at WPP) outlined how the future of LLMs may shift influence from search to recommendation to purchase support, as people hand more decisions to AI systems. It was framed as progress, with an emphasis on higher quality products, greater reliance on reviews and new opportunities for advertisers to appear alongside conversational platforms. This innovation is positioned as trust-building. Yet someone behind me chuckled nervously and called it dystopian. That reaction felt more indicative of the room. When the audience was asked whether AI would make advertising more trustworthy, 85 per cent said no. As Suresh Balaji (Chief Marketing Officer from Lloyds Banking Group) pointed out, that response reflects the wider climate. Trust has eroded at a systems level and advertising operates within that system, yet the forward-looking panels struggled to stir enthusiasm.

A similar tension surfaced in the discussion on creators. It was widely acknowledged that trust increasingly sits with influencers and creators in a growing digital landscape, because it is built publicly over time through consistency, cultural fluency and perceived authenticity. Advisors spoke about collaborating with them and handing over the reins, allowing them to continue doing what they already do well: connect with audiences. People follow people, not formats, and algorithms reward familiarity and engagement. The influencer paradox was also raised. People claim to distrust influencer advertising in general, yet deeply trust specific creators. Trust is abstract at scale but personal in practice.

This is straightforward, as investment in influencer marketing is rising and collaboration is, and was during panels, increasingly encouraged to be involved as a constant staple in campaigns. But I couldn't help but notice that there were no creators on the main board discussion?  A push for training, checks and professionalisation was introduced to formalise the sector. Yet creators built credibility long before brands formalised partnerships. Their authority is relational and contextual. The uncomfortable question lingers: if creators hold narrative, trust and distribution, is advertising leading creatively or primarily allocating capital and amplifying what others originate?

This is the underlying tension of the day. The industry is talking about trust while its structural authority is fragmenting. Platforms shape infrastructure. Creators shape culture. AI intermediates decisions. Advertising is negotiating its place within that system.

There were reminders that trust in advertising has grown among younger audiences and that enjoyment, storytelling and cultural sharpness still resonate. Yet trust is rarely embedded as a core planning metric. If AI systems layer recommendations into everyday life, platforms mediate attention and creators hold intimacy with audiences, advertising must define where it adds distinct value.

A centenary marks history but invites scrutiny. What is the value of LEAD if the room does not reflect the world it claims to lead? From a Gen Z vantage point, the gaps were difficult to overlook. While I was grateful to be there on an accessible youth ticket, it still felt like a familiar pattern: young people referenced as the future, yet rarely included in shaping it. Leaders debated what comes next without many of those who will live with the consequences in the room.

Trust today has been forged through social media, creator ecosystems and digital communities that operate differently from legacy institutions. That shift was acknowledged in discussion, but not in the programming. Few young voices. No creators on panels. Limited visible diversity in an increasingly metropolitan society. Only one major tech platform represented (Google).

If leadership through trust is the ambition, is advertising truly leading, or is it being led?

At The Unmistakables, we work with leaders to build the cultural foundations that make trust credible: psychological safety, inclusive decision-making and the courage to examine power.

Advertising can tell the story. But culture determines whether it’s believed.