“I run an ad awards show. They’re imperfect, but vital in creativity’s war against mediocrity”
By Tim Lindsay,
CEO of D&AD
Publicis Groupe’s withdrawal from all awards shows for the next 12 months raises some interesting issues about the shows themselves: Are we too big, too greedy, not properly reflective of the industry, inaccessible? Are we still for the creative community that creates the magic and the value in our business? Are we a force for good in the 21st century communications economy?
These are all valid questions that need to be responsibly considered.
Of course, some of this applies more directly to Cannes Lions than it does to the not-for-profit shows; the ones like D&AD (of which I am CEO), the One Club and others that put their surpluses back into the industry in an effort to develop talent, promote real excellence and address big industry issues like lack of diversity and poor gender balance.
To be fair, Cannes does some of this stuff too. But it’s a publicly listed company and has to increase its profits every year for its shareholders and executives. It has to chase the money. And the money is now disproportionately in the hands of the technology companies, the ad-tech firms and the big consultancies. You can see them dominating the beach. They’re the reason that large parts of the creative community feel that Cannes is no longer for them.
And this is where the bigger issue arising out of this fascinating kerfuffle lies. It’s the conflict that appears to some to exist between the forces of technology and all that it drives; and creativity and craft–very neatly symbolized by Publicis Groupe’s planned AI platform, Marcel, and the creative community’s (mostly) disappointed reaction to it and what it signifies.
Because here’s the thing: Tech advances have been of immense benefit to our business, even as they precipitated great change. They have changed the way we live our lives in almost every respect and created new and valuable experiences. But in our world, they’re also principally about distribution, enablement and analytics.
A semi-automated, leaden-footed pop-up ad that chases us around the internet because its perpetrators have harvested our social data is still a piece of crap, however cleverly it’s been targeted and bought. And there’s a lot of it out there. Craft and creativity are as important now as they’ve always been, perhaps more so. Brilliant ideas beautifully executed will always create better outcomes.
And that, folks, is why awards shows matter and why Publicis Groupe is, with respect, making a mistake.
Awards shows challenge and stimulate the industry to do better. They set a bar and a standard. They reward and motivate creative people. They help brilliant new companies break through and brilliant new talents make their name. They are an effective marketing tool. They provide a crucial metric for our business and for our clients. They drive effectiveness. They preserve great work for posterity in order to inspire future generations. They encourage new talent to join our industry and help that talent prosper. They train and nurture our practitioners. In many cases they campaign for a fairer, more sustainable industry in the belief that that’s how we will serve our clients better. They encourage innovation, experimentation and risk taking. They are woven into the fabric of our industry and deliver enormous value..
We call this “stimulation, not congratulation,” because more of the former and less of the latter is probably appropriate at this interesting time.
So yes, by all means let’s take stock and perhaps even thank Publicis Groupe for causing us to pause and reflect. But let’s not throw the healthy baby out with the dirty bathwater. The war against mediocrity continues and awards have a crucial part to play.
9 Comments
If you want a sustainable awards industry you need to tier entries. Current models favour bigger companies with a lot of cash to waste on awards. Smaller guys who are perhaps just as creative but doing things without the overhead and with no profit to spare can’t afford the entires. Company of 2 people – maybe they have a killer idea but even if they charge well for their creativity, there is a ton less money in that scale of enterprise than an operation the size of RGA. So smaller companies need lower entry fees. Bigger companies need bigger fees to really make them think hard about what it is they are entering. Who has been to the AWARD awards and GROANED at how the big guys enter a piece of work into every possible category? Please, be selective, is it really your best work or do you just want to show it off? Tiered fees even the playing field.
So that Melbourne agency that won what, 56 lions? At around $500 per entry that’s $26k worth. Assuming a hit rate of 100%. If they had a win rate of 50% they dropped 50k on Cannes alone, not including flights, junkets, hotels, wine, and other stuff.
If you want sustainable awards you need to even the playing field so the smaller shops can compete based on ideas, not awards budgets.
Actually, Cannes entry fees start at 515 Euro (not dollars) and zoom up from there. The Integrated one is 1300 Euro.
Just goes to show that today, creative advertising doesn’t mean anything to anyone anymore. Even to a megagroup like Publicis.
Does advertising keep on getter better because of awards? Do films keep on getting better because of the Oscars? Does music keep on getting better because of the Grammys? I don’t think so.
Awards don’t necessarily raise the level of creativity. They simply recognise creativity.
I have edited the third-last paragraph to bring some semblance of truth into the debate by adding the word SHOULD…
‘Awards shows SHOULD challenge and stimulate the industry to do better. They SHOULD set a bar and a standard. They SHOULD reward and motivate creative people. They SHOULD help brilliant new companies break through and brilliant new talents make their name. They SHOULD BE an effective marketing tool. They SHOULD provide a crucial metric for our business and for our clients. They SHOULD drive effectiveness. They SHOULD preserve great work for posterity in order to inspire future generations. They SHOULD encourage new talent to join our industry and help that talent prosper. They SHOULD train and nurture our practitioners. In SOME cases they campaign for a fairer, more sustainable industry in the belief that that’s how we will serve our clients better. They SHOULD encourage innovation, experimentation and risk taking. They are woven into the fabric of our industry and SHOULD deliver enormous value..’
Unfortunately Awards have utterly corrupted our industry and spawned a scam culture which creates ads without a client brief for the purpose of winning awards, not solving client marketing problems with brilliance – which is what they once were.
@Not convinced,
Music and film are products made with the intention of drawing mass appeal from consumers in order to maximise profit.
Advertising is, at best, made to sell products to maximise their profit.
Currently it’s a race to the bottom with clients wanting to promote their product through Facebook, Search, data, mobile banner ads, BOGOF offers and a whole tsunami of noise.
Look around, advertising is not getting better. It’s getting less and less money. It’s getting far more data driven and far less creative. Even Publicis want to replace their network with a bot.
And yet there are more award shows and more awards than ever.
If improvement of standards is really award shows objective, they have failed dismally.
@8:38, I couldn’t agree more. But advertising is not a product, which people often confuse it with.
It’s not just the entry fee. If you’re entering a campaign you now have to make a high-quality video to showcase the work (usually ending with everyone hugging each other and shedding tears, of course). Very resource intensive (i.e. totally pie-in-the-sky) for a small agency. To level the playing field, I’d recommend that case studies should all be in slideshare format (except for the actual video content obviously).
@Dark days: In a lot of cases advertising IS part of the product – or the emotional component of it at any rate.