Home The Sell Sider Data Says No: In Defense Of The Right Brain

Data Says No: In Defense Of The Right Brain

SHARE:
Lara-OShea-Executive-Strategy-Director

The Sell Sider” is a column written by the sell side of the digital media community.

Today’s column is written by Lara O’Shea, Executive Strategy Director, VMLY&R.

Those who lived in noughties Britain will remember the scenes in Little Britain where David Walliams played customer service advisor Carol Beers; she lived behind her computer screen, and her response to any reasonable request would be “Computer says no.”

Fast-forward a couple of decades, and we find ourselves in the era of data-driven decision-making and data-augmented creativity. No one disputes that intelligent use of data unlocks smarter insights and greater business results. In fact, McKinsey argues, “Companies that harness creativity and data in tandem have growth rates twice as high as companies that don’t.”

But all too often, marketers are falling into the trap of “data says no,” hiding behind data to make decisions, sometimes predetermined, without broad exploration. For instance, it’s easy to create an overreliance on data to justify a creative idea rather than using data for insightful strategy development. It’s a deadly temptation to rely blindly on data to make decisions without questioning data validity, source, motivation, collection methodology and in-built biases, or interrogating the analytical approach. 

When we fail to look at the whole picture, we risk misinterpreting data. For example, when analyzing websites, we often attribute a long dwell time to engagement, believing someone is interested in spending time exploring what’s on the site. But what if this is actually a confused user trying to navigate a badly designed page? 

This failure to consider the broader landscape can have larger, dangerous consequences; as companies increasingly lean into machine learning and AI, they should be reminded that the data that is inputted will shape the outputs – a lesson Amazon learned through strong criticism of its AI recruiting recommendation tool. The tool over-favored men for technical jobs because the historical datasets they used were biased toward men.  

Mar tech and ad tech solutions are, likewise, sometimes programmed and left to their own devices without human guidance or interpretation. I distinctly remember returning from the hospital with a new baby, only to be served Facebook ads encouraging me to put my baby up for adoption. For the many new moms who suffer from postnatal depression – who might be adjusting to motherhood without a community around them – this could have exacerbated mental health issues and might have been devastating. 

As marketers, it’s our job to orchestrate, curate, interpret and harness. Data cannot and should not replace critical thinking; it should augment thinking. It’s up to us to be curious, to harness and hone data to help us understand and interpret the world around us, and then to create and deploy creative as effectively and efficiently as possible. Harvard Business Review emphasizes this importance of curiosity, stating it “has been hailed as one of the most critical competencies for the modern workplace.”

In this whole-brained thinking approach, data is a key ingredient. But it could be argued that, as a society, we have come to rely too much on the left side of our brains to the detriment of seeing the big picture. This removal of our human judgment, this overreliance on tactical data and dashboards rather than leaving space for nuance, is the “data says no” trap. 

When we become too reliant on data as the answer, and bypass interpretation as a result, we fall into the trap of ignoring what can’t be quantified, and we risk losing so many valuable and rich human insights. Instead, we need to be careful not to hide behind data as a way to make decisions without enough thinking and surround ourselves with more enhanced data literacy, where we can both interpret and challenge our assumptions and ideas.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

Data and data-driven marketing are now essential parts of a brand’s success, but data alone is not enough. It is the insights discovered from the data, and their creative application to real human needs, that will help brands win in the long run. 

With contributions from Craig Elimeliah, executive creative director, VMLY&R.

Follow VMLY&R (@VMLYR) and AdExchanger (@adexchanger) on Twitter.

Must Read

Jamie Seltzer, global chief data and technology officer, Havas Media Network, speaks to AdExchanger at CES 2026.

CES 2026: What’s Real – And What’s BS – When It Comes To AI

Ad industry experts call out trends to watch in 2026 and separate the real AI use cases having an impact today from the AI hype they heard at CES.

New Startup Pinch AI Tackles The Growing Problem Of Ecommerce Return Scams

Fraud is eating into retail profits. A new startup called Pinch AI just launched with $5 million in funding to fight back.

Comic: Shopper Marketing Data

CPG Data Seller SPINS Moves Into Media With MikMak Acquisition

On Wednesday, retail and CPG data company SPINS added a new piece with its acquisition of MikMak, a click-to-buy ad tech and analytics startup that helps optimize their commerce media.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters

How Valvoline Shifted Marketing Gears When It Became A Pure-Play Retail Brand

Believe it or not, car oil change service company Valvoline is in the midst of a fascinating retail marketing transformation.

AdExchanger's Big Story podcast with journalistic insights on advertising, marketing and ad tech

The Big Story: Live From CES 2026

Agents, streamers and robots, oh my! Live from the C-Space campus at the Aria Casino in Las Vegas, our team breaks down the most interesting ad tech trends we saw at CES this year.

Monopoly Man looks on at the DOJ vs. Google ad tech antitrust trial (comic).

2025: The Year Google Lost In Court And Won Anyway

From afar, it looks like Google had a rough year in antitrust court. But zoom in a bit and it becomes clear that the past year went about as well as Google could have hoped for.