'Grief Tech' in marketing: Black Mirror or golden opportunity?

Do you think Grief Tech will take off in the UK?

It’s hard to say. My anecdotal experience is that the British public are a touch more conservative than their peers across the Atlantic, and may find the idea a bit too “Black Mirror”-esque. However, we’re talking about a sector which taps into some of the most emotional periods of a person’s life, and any tool that helps an individual seek solace will have an appeal for some.

From a legal perspective, non-UK tech companies offering AI-personas of deceased persons to individuals in the UK will have additional regulatory considerations to take into account, like protective laws around deepfakes, misleading advertising and data protection laws (if training data involves a living person). In most cases businesses will be able to navigate these hurdles, and the UK government has sought to position itself in recent months as an “AI maker”, not an “AI taker”, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see these products starting to seep into general usage amongst the public in the foreseeable future.

How can the technology be utilised by marketers?

It’s a space that will need to be navigated carefully and empathetically by marketers. Brands may market their products by providing grief tech-style product features. Could, for example, a smart phone of a deceased person be used as a tool after death to help loved ones navigate their personal affairs? We already see companies like Meta providing functionality in respect of the social media accounts of deceased persons.

I don’t doubt that implementing ads into AI-generated content will be technically possible. We already see AI personal assistants linking with brands to provide services, like Google Assistant providing the option to order food for delivery.

Finally, marketers will need to tread carefully when using analytics data from persons accessing these services. As always, user choice will be central to using the technology ethically.

How can agencies market grief tech and similar technologies?

A compassion-first approach should be taken by agencies. The CAP Code specifically states that references to anyone who is dead in ads “must be handled with particular care to avoid causing offence or distress”. Grief tech might be promoted responsibly alongside more traditional techniques to deal with grief, such as therapy services.

If looking to incorporate ads into a grief tech service, marketers will need to be very careful about being transparent regarding ad content and to ensure they are not being misleading. In the UK, where a brand has paid for content (or put in place some other form of reciprocal arrangement) the CAP Code will apply, which requires ads not be misleading and be “obviously identifiable”. For example, the ASA has previously cracked down on “advertorial” content: content designed to look like editorial content but which is, in fact, sponsored.

Is it ethical to do so?

This will come down to how the marketing is done in practice, and best practices will evolve as data around the use of grief tech becomes available. A tool which might provide comfort to individuals should not immediately be dismissed, despite the fact others may find it “creepy”. However, the grief tech sector is inherently linked to emotionally charged rhetoric: marketers will need to consider the optics of ad content and navigate ethical concerns around transparency and prevention of harm to an even greater degree than normal.

An extract of Helena's comments was published in Marketing Beat, 20 February 2025, and can be found here.