Terry, Richard and Mark: Tell me, are these winning Australian ads actually scam?
Serious questions have been raised over two Australian ad campaigns that won major awards at the Cannes Lions festival last month. The agencies and brands behind them have declined to answer those questions. In this open letter from Mumbrella’s Tim Burrowes, he challenges the brand custodians of McDonald’s, Panasonic and the Cannes Lions to help get to the bottom of things.
Hi Richard, Mark and Terry,
You may not know each other, so before I get to my point, allow me to introduce you all…
Richard Tassone is Panasonic Australia’s top marketer. He was promoted to director of Panasonic’s Consumer Group at the beginning of this year and has been with the brand in Australia for 14 years, including as GM of marketing since 2010.
So he knows what’s what.
(Richard’s creative agency of record in Australia is JWT – I’ll explain why I mention that shortly.)
Mark Lollback is another experienced and well respected marketer. He’s chief marketing officer of McDonald’s in Australia and New Zealand, where he’s been for nearly three years now. Before that, he was CMO of ANZ Banking Group. And before that, he was CEO of Pepsi Lipton International, and indeed also did a stint as VP of marketing at Unilever Foods.
So Mark also knows what’s what.
And I’m sure both of you guys know who Terry Savage is. Terry is the face of the Cannes Lions. If you were to come up with a list of the most influential people in the world on the topic of advertising creativity, Terry would be on that list. Before he ran the Cannes Lions, Terry was executive chairman of cinema advertising firm Val Morgan – which he helped expand into a global company. And he was president of the Screen Advertising World Association too.
So we’re lucky to have him living here in Australia.
Of course, I’ve just realised. Mark and Terry, you do know each other already. I see that later this month the two of you are presenting a session at ADMA’s Creative Fuel conference on the topic of “What It takes to win a Lion”.
Funnily enough, that’s exactly why I’m dropping the three of you a line.
Richard, your brand was the recipient of one of just three trophies for Australia in the Press Lions category.
It was a bronze for this imaginative stuff.
Congratulations, Richard.
And Mark, you must be even prouder. McDonald’s got silver for this.
Well done, Mark.
Given that some years Australia wins next to nothing in the Press Lions, it’s a great achievement.
And while I’m congratulating people, well done to you too, Terry.
Given that it costs more than $700 to enter (and much more in some categories), and you had 37,427 entries (an all time record), there are thirty million reasons for congratulations.
And that’s before the $4,000 ticket price from 12,000 delegates. So that’s another 48 million reasons to congratulate you.
And then it looks like you got some pretty good sponsor support. I won’t even begin to guess how much that was worth…
So well done all three of you.
But I’ve got a bit of a question. Well, originally, our readers did. Then we started asking it.
Nobody seems to know where the ads ran.
As you would know, that’s relevant for a couple of reasons.
First, the spirit of advertising awards is to celebrate great work that helps clients solve real problems. That means working to a brief in the real world.
Second, the rules mean that could leave a bit of wriggle room. So long as the ads have run somewhere, at least once, they can technically be eligible if the client had a hand in it.
Of course, if your ad only runs single column width, once, on the back page of The Manly Daily, it might technically be eligible, but it doesn’t really seem to be in the spirit of things, does it?
But this is what the rules of entering the Cannes Lions say:
-
Directors’ cuts, spec ads and conceptual advertising are not eligible.
-
The Festival reserves the right to request a full media schedule from each entrant company to verify the authenticity of the entry in the event that entry is shortlisted or a winner.
-
In the event of a complaint against any winning or shortlisted entry, the Festival organisers will conduct a full investigation into each case and will request detailed documentation from all parties concerned including the complainant, the entrants and the client.
-
The Festival organisers will have no hesitation in withdrawing an award in cases where the complaint is upheld.
-
Entrants or companies who are proved to have deliberately and knowingly contravened any rules relating to eligibility may be barred from entering the awards for a period of time following the Festival as specified by the organisers.
Pretty clear, I think.
But there’s more. Here’s what Cannes Lions said in a statement on scam entries back in 2009. It’s a bit long, but I think it’s worth sharing in full.
STATEMENT FROM CANNES LIONS ON ‘SCAM’ ENTRIES
14 OCTOBER 2009
There are many definitions of “scam”, and the issue is rarely black and white. As such, we want to develop a policy that is not only workable but also enforceable.
The role of Cannes Lions and its associated Festivals (Eurobest, Dubai Lynx and Spikes Asia) is to set the benchmark for creativity in communications, to celebrate creativity and to reward the industry for outstanding creative work.
Our role is not to come between the client and the agency; it is not to have a negative material effect on agency business; and it is not to penalise individuals from an agency who have not had any association with the work in question.
Our key rules in this regard are simple: “Entries cannot be made without the prior permission of the advertiser/owner of the rights of the advertisement. All entries must have been made within the context of a normal paying contract with a client. That client must have paid for all, or the majority of, the media costs.”
It is our policy that when a piece of work comes into question, we request clarification or further information according to the complaint raised. If it is not forthcoming or not adequate, we withdraw the award.
In future we will continue to withdraw awards that do not meet our entry criteria and announce that we have done so.
Our entry criteria include:
- Submitting full client details (including name, position and full contact details)
- A senior officer (CD, CEO or Chairman) from the entrant company must authorise the entry
Our checks include:
- That the client is legitimate and that the product corresponds with their portfolio
- Judges are offered the opportunity to raise queries with the organisers and information is gathered accordingly throughout the judging (media schedules, client authorisation, etc.)
We believe that banning agencies from entering on a wholesale basis is unfair on blameless individuals. There are many people who work in agencies who may not be involved with an erroneous entry and therefore should not be penalised. Our policy will be to ban the individuals named on the credit list if a scam is discovered.
The length and nature of the ban will be decided based on the seriousness of the case involved. We take the view that not all issues are the same and each case should be dealt with on its own merits.
In summary, the key issues which will guide us through this process are:
- Was the work approved and paid for by the client and was it run using media space paid for by the client?
- If an entry fails to meet this or other entry criteria, we will withdraw the award and make an appropriate announcement.
- If we deem it is required, we will ban the individuals involved from entering our awards for a specific period of time which will be decided at that time.
That’s a pretty brave and comprehensive policy, Terry.
After all, if you put off agencies from entering their work, then those millions of dollars of entry fees might drop off.
So well done, you.
The rules are pretty clear, aren’t they?
The ad has to have been commissioned by the client; the media placement has to have been paid for by the client; and the ad has to have run.
But this is where, as I’ve alluded, it all gets a bit odd.
For one thing, as one of our readers pointed out, the McDonald’s work doesn’t seem to follow the usual brand guidelines. And the Panasonic ad doesn’t have much of a mainstream feel to it either.
So we asked Ebiquity, who usually monitor press advertising, where these two very creative campaigns ran.
They couldn’t find anything.
Another odd thing, Richard, is that JWT is your agency of record. According to The Source, Saatchis isn’t even on your roster. Yet they’re the one that won the award.
Here are the credits:
(Interestingly, but coincidentally, ECD Damon Stapleton was the Australian representative on the Press Lions jury himself.)
And while I’m at it, here are the McDonald’s credits…
So we rang your people at the Panasonic and McDonald’s press offices. And this is where it all began to get a bit weird.
To be honest, the statements we were given were kind of bullshit. They didn’t actually answer the question we’d asked about where the ads had run.
Richard, your press office referred us to the agency. Here’s what Saatchi & Saatchi gave us:
“The Panasonic Nanoe TM technology for Automotive Airconditioners is one of the most innovative technologies used in the automotive industry. We (Saatchi & Saatchi) developed the dog print ads campaign as a project for Panasonic to demonstrate the benefit of fresher air through this technology in an engaging way that everyone can relate to. The print campaign ran in March and April.”
And, Mark, this is what your press office said about the work for you:
“We were really pleased with the Big Mac Legends campaign which was rolled out across outdoor and radio in addition to print placements.
“Like most well known legends, The Big Mac is now instantly recognisable simply by its seven famous ingredients. The McDonald’s Big Mac Legends campaign underlines this by placing famed legends, such as Darth Vader and Superman, side-by-side McDonald’s biggest legend. The creative however does not include names, just each legend’s distinguishable ingredients because after all, when you know the ingredients, you know the legend.”
I’m sure you guys can understand why our curiosity was by now piqued.
It was starting to feel like the work had either not run, or perhaps had been run cheaply in some out-of-the-way regional title or perhaps overseas.
So Terry, we decided to ask the Cannes Lions press office about it. As you’ll be aware, you have a very high quality team. They’re usually extremely responsive.
But, oddly, they haven’t been acknowledging our questions, let alone answering them. At all. My colleague Miranda has been emailing your PR and press manager Amanda Benfell. (I’ve dealt with Amanda before – she’s excellent at her job.)
It was very odd to get no answer at all from such a professional outfit.
Now Terry, I know you’ve been taking a well-earned break. Miranda emailed you too and you told her you might be able to “connect” with her later this month. But I’m sure you’d want to correct any misperception that Cannes doesn’t take this sort of thing seriously just because it would affect the revenue stream.
And Richard, we never succeeded in getting past your press office.
But I see you’re quoted in Channel News:
Richard Tassone the Director, Consumer Electronics Group at Panasonic Australia told ChannelNews that Panasonic Australia “did not publish this advertisement in Australia” he added “We have put no TV commercials to air this year nor have we booked this campaign”.
Funnily enough, when we asked Mat Baxter, the boss of UM, the media agency that usually books media advertising for Panasonic, he also told us the booking hadn’t gone through them.
It’s all a bit awkward, isn’t it?
And in case you were wondering, we have no axe to grind with the agencies in question – quite the opposite in fact.
DDB is currently one of the best operations in the country. I was delighted when its work for Devondale won campaign of the year at the Mumbrella Awards last month. It was great work, solving a tough client brief and helping redefine a very competitive category. DDB is also our APAC network of the year.
And I have nothing but praise for the job done by Damon (who funnily enough has just moved to DDB NZ) for Saatchi & Saatchi. If an award were to be given for turnaround story of the last couple of years, it would go to that agency. Under Michael Rebelo, Saatchis is back on the map and on an upward trajectory.
But our job is to ask questions of everybody – including our friends.
Terry – this year, we sent two journos to Cannes. With flights and accommodation it’s expensive. We do it because we see you as the pre-eminent advertising festival on the planet. And that’s because winning is meaningful and we want to be there to record genuine Australian success.
When I decide whether to invest that resource next year, I hope I can be confident that you really do take scam seriously.
And Mark and Richard – these efforts have taken place in the names of your brands. I’d be much obliged if you could clear up what may well be a huge misunderstanding.
Mark and Terry, I’m looking forward to watching your presentation on how to win Lions at Creative Fuel. Will you be taking questions afterwards?
Cheers,
Tim
Content director, Mumbrella
great to see you staying on this Tim…it’s essential that things are resolved for the integrity of the agencies involved as well as Cannes
User ID not verified.
Tim, thank you.
Whilst working in media sales – press, I had the good fortune to work under a Director of Sales whom has a supreme passion for creativity. We were charged with driving creativity in the press category with agencies and clients alike.
I saw some wonderful work produced in my 4 years under this DOS… however very, very few of the creative ever ran…
“Accountability of the medium”, “significantly reduced budgets” and “change in brand strategy” were some of the excuses we heard. We even went to the lengths of offering heavily discounted schedules to inspire the industry leaders to “think differently”…. with little success.
I know I am not alone when I say I am genuinely excited by a truly creative advert, no matter the medium… it delights/entertains me, it drives me to think differently about the brand/product and above all I respect them for respecting me… it’s just been a while since I saw one such ad (in real life)…
I look forward to responses from Terry & Amanda and Richard & Mark.
User ID not verified.
Great work. Nice investigative stuff. More of this please!
User ID not verified.
I can’t see how these can’t be legit – I mean come on, in this day and age with 24 hour worldwide scrutiny, surely not one is silly enough to think a scam at Cannes won’t get jumped on?
User ID not verified.
Great article Tim.
Intrigued for the outcome.
User ID not verified.
Dog with a bone.
Hats off.
Sir John Hegarty spoke about this pervasive scamming.
In the UK it’s called ChipShop advertising. There are even awards for ChipShop.
It’s a legitimate way to show your capability in work you’d like to do for clients’ you’d like to win, but on Chip Shops and the like who have no budget and are grateful for any publicity. ‘Ambient’ is the biggest category.
Everytime I see a video production company post a video on youTube purporting to be for a client and it’s longer than 30 seconds I raise an eyebroow.
Had many rows with these folk.
I client isn’t legit, if the work isn’t paid for, if no media spend was invested – it’s a scam.
can you imagine if Cannes investigated every winner – it would be like dope testing every winner in the Olympics… oh they do that? That’s because legitimacy underpins the value of that brand. Cheaters are outed, prosecuted and derided. In sport, politics and business. And Advertising is a pretty huge frigging business.
User ID not verified.
While your at Tim, please look into where Leo Burnetts wwf ad ran . .
User ID not verified.
Nice to see some vitriolic truth… and totally warranted by the looks!
User ID not verified.
Apologies, it seems legit
User ID not verified.
You’re right Felix. Leos was the third Australian winner this year. When we asked, they very quickly told us their campaign ran in Time magazine. So it seemed fair to leave them out of this piece.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
now that was worth reading…good stuff
User ID not verified.
Can I nominate you for an award for this piece?
User ID not verified.
Sadly this is not a new situation, it’s something that has happened for years, it’s just the industry chooses to turn a collective blind eye because the lure of a future potential award is more attractive than the feeling of integrity gained from only doing work that was commissioned to serve a purpose higher than pure award show fodder.
There are some wonderful things out there. Things that show the real value and creativity of this industry but this tsunami of scam undermines us all and yet we let it happen … again and again and again.
User ID not verified.
This is why I (occasionally) tune in to Mummy and not the others: the hard questions being asked. So thank you.
If only you were around when a well-known so-called now-ex CD got busted for copying an award-winning ad from NZ that featured white crosses on a road (you can publish this Tim as I doubt anyone would remember the storm that ensued – and the protests of innocence).
User ID not verified.
Maybe a performance-based Cannes Lions?
User ID not verified.
I can seem to hear “make it go away…” from various places around Australia right now.
Make it stay Tim!
User ID not verified.
Good work. Sadly this has been going on for at least 30 years – one of my earliest jobs was to book 1 x 30 sec on WIN TV Wollongong for a normally non TV client in 1984 just so the agency could legitimately enter some award thingie. I’m not even sure if the client was even aware that they were nominated.
User ID not verified.
As a content creator, I must say congrats to the Mumbrella team.
Your tone is excellent. Civil, yet subtle in its implications. And you haven’t meandered into “rant” territory. Which is VERY hard to do in these sort of situations.
I see big pageviews and a future for this post on the RHS as most commented for the month.
Well done. Good journalism for pinko leftie communist latte sippers.
User ID not verified.
@Harpo : Well I remember the storm that ensured – the creative in question sat next to me at the Cannes screening where is was shown and later denied ever seeing the spot. To be fair he may have been asleep at the time, or had his head down. It was on the show reel of the agency I joined subsequently and was a severe embarrassment to the organisation that unwittingly recycled it. They needed HELP to forget it, I’m sure. Suits should always see the Cannes winners as well, just to check for recycling.
User ID not verified.
Awesome work, well done! Let’s see what will follow…
User ID not verified.
Good work! And I love the “butter wouldn’t melt” tone.
User ID not verified.
Hi Tim,
Thank you for your courage. No fear, no favour shown. The questions you are asking…. this is pure journalistic gold. My greatest admiration.
User ID not verified.
Perhaps the Mumbrella Awards could include an award honouring those agencies that participate in scam.
Palme D’oh ?
User ID not verified.
annoying all the right people – nice one Tim.
User ID not verified.
It all feels a little ‘Lance Armstrong’ – we all know the stories about the increasing number of scam entries in developing nations, or the stories about French agencies essentially taking a month off each year to produce scam ideas for Cannes (True). But even if everyone else is doing it, doesn’t mean we should too. Lance was still an amazing athlete who overcame an incredible hurdle, but sadly for Lance, his name now is merely associated with lies, cheating and deception.
User ID not verified.
Simple solution and I’m certain Caxton entries at one stage in the late 80’s had this as an entry requirement.
Every press category entry MUST contain a printed tear sheet from at least 1 publication pasted to the back of the beautifully crafted digital print with the publication name and run date on the entry, then there is no question it at least ran, and easy to track down who actually paid for the insertion through the publisher.
User ID not verified.
Try reading this without Churchill’s distinctive tones in your head 🙂
“We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender”
But seriously Tim and team – give them stick – your integrity and dogged determination might bring some long-overdue discipline to the industry. And plenty more amusing posts on the matter …
User ID not verified.
Dear Mumbrella,
It is rather churlish of you to question our credentials.
For the record, we have allowed this work to be represented as such because we are stuck in airless offices all day for most of the year conducting endlessly pointless meetings. The only reward we can find for ourselves is to go to Cannes and hang out with arrested adolescent-types in ironically humorous t-shirts and PARTAYYYYY!!!!!
Get a life. No-one will care about your attempts to get to the truth. Why? Because your conscientiousness does not penetrate the upper executive echelons where malfeasance is concealed with a nod and a wink.
We have lobbied your owners to appoint Janet Albrechtson as your Executive Creative Direction Editor. That should shut youse up.
Sincerely,
The hurted trio.
User ID not verified.
@Groucho – brother, you must be old. But Tim is right to pursue this issue as it is THE elephant in the room. I think the then B&T ran articles on the aforementioned rip off by the aforementioned CD – checkable Tim if you’re interested, circa 1990 I reckon – oh how one would welcome a comment on propriety and other misdemeanours of the creative kind from the Usurperer now he’s smirking all the way to the bank…
User ID not verified.
Hi Tim, great piece, maintain (the subtle and controlled) rage!
cheers
matt
User ID not verified.
Funny, I think this whole article is about brand (moderated by Mumbrella for legal reasons – nice try Harpo)
User ID not verified.
Why does anyone really care about this so much? We all know its navel-gazing and self-congratulatory stuff, but this really comes across as a bitter and sanctimonious crusade. Let them have their shiny door-stoppers. It’s no skin off your nose.
User ID not verified.
Way you can back investigate a lot of anti-gun ads in the mid 2000s?
User ID not verified.
Do not let this one go Tim. Not until you have an answer. The silence is damning.
User ID not verified.
The agency has done wrong but lets not forget the role these marketers have played. Shame. Shame. Shame.
User ID not verified.
Maybe the word “Award” is misused here. If Cooper Cronk won the Daly M Award last year and may of come off the bench in a game, if at all what would the Rugby League community think of that?
User ID not verified.
To ‘Really’,
It’s important because:
– shit like this does further damage to an industry already struggling for credibility.
– it highlights the flawed system of remuneration, kpi’s and career promotions being tied to awards
– it highlights the compromising situation of award shows potentially upsetting their revenue stream (agencies) by penalising them.
– it makes it even harder to sell in ‘genuine’ creative work.
User ID not verified.
Look, if you want to really get picky on award winners, look at some of the results touted in entries.
Leo Burnett claimed a 20% reduction in road fatalities on their Samsung S Drive mobile lion winner. Along with a 67% reduction in road accidents.
According to the description on the Samsung app store the app wont work outside the Hunter Valley region because it was a pilot project only available in the Hunter. Did fatalities and road accidents decrease by that amount in the Hunter?
The app launched Feb 28, 2014 according to the app store. The entry board says results since March 2014. So in 30 days, fatalities and accidents were down?
The fact it was a pilot program isn’t mentioned anywhere in the entry.
Given this lack of disclosure, would the jury think differently about it?
User ID not verified.
@Groucho – brother, maybe he was hanging his head in shame – or just going down on himself?
User ID not verified.
Tim,
as an ex Client who had the odd request from an Agency for a one off piece of creative to be run once so it could be entered in some Awards event my answer was always the same.
“What if it wins, won’t I look like a dill for having this great award winning creative that I only ran once. I’m not going to look like a dill so you can be famous.”
Bet these Clients wish they didn’t look like dills now!
User ID not verified.
What about Leo’s “small world machine” [sic – singular] from last year?
User ID not verified.
@Really? Just curious; what do you expect Tim do do?
User ID not verified.
Dear Tim
I am suddenly seeing the trades in two clear camps.
Those who are just happy to turn a blind eye and pretend the decline isn’t happening.
And the only who isn’t afraid to ask difficult questions because they truly believe we can all aspire to be better.
I salute your principles, backbone and civilized manners.
User ID not verified.
Good article and well done for shining a light on this. Having been on both sides of the fence for over 20 years agencies use these shiny awards to dazzle clients, and win business.
But if its a fake ad than never ran, or was never paid for, that won the award, that wins the account, then that is actually false advertising.
User ID not verified.
It’s long overdue that some of the bullshit practices this industry prides itself on, were challenged and someone held accountable.
It’s a widely accepted ethic that juniors get themselves jobs slaving away on ‘proactive’ work, conceived solely to chase awards. Often this is done for the benefit of keeping some barely relevant ECD in a job for another year, lest he miss his target. For a junior, it’s one way to get yourself into a job, or keep yourself in one should your day to day brief not cut it from an awards perspective. Clients are encouraged to play along too, because they starved the agency of award opportunities in their standard briefs, and so this will be a morale booster for the creative teams. Oh and they’ll get the benefit of being seen as a creative/innovative marketer / brand too.
Everyone wins, right?
This is standard fare, particularly in the larger agencies that chase the points from award shows to claim their status as best network, regional office or other such title.
I thank the team at Mumbrella for persisting.
User ID not verified.
Great journalism.
User ID not verified.
Great piece, Tim. Well done on asking the hard questions of the big end of town. Nice that you include the emails sent and all the other guff, so readers can see how you’ve investigated. Top job.
User ID not verified.
The real culprits are the owners of big agency networks. They pressure their CCOs to bring in the metals, who then pressure their country ECDs to produce the goods, who then hire award junkies to create them. Like in narcotics, we can’t rid the menace by just targeting the pushers while the drug loads walk free.
User ID not verified.
Excellent work. Best trade pub in the biz.
User ID not verified.
Great reporting. I’m also VERY surprised that DDB Melbourne’s ‘Minute of Silence’ for the RSL took gold when the exact same idea won silver in 2011 for British Legion’s ‘2 minutes of silence’. Looks suspiciously like some cozy judging arrangements going on with that award too.
User ID not verified.
Well done. Good piece – as usual Mumbrella has outdone The Australian’s media section, whose Darren Davidson had this to contribute: “ONE boring and deeply unimportant issue surfaces every year at the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity. …. and so on.
If it’s so boring and unimportant why did the Oz devote 400 words to it?
User ID not verified.
Thanks, Jack B Nimble,
I did see that piece. I’m sure it was just an oversight that he forgot to declare an interest in his comment piece – that his employer News Corp is the official Australian representative of Cannes Lions.
But I’m sure his views (curious as they are) are sincerely held.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
I only wish there was a Asian Mumbrella and a Sth American Mumbrella doing this.
User ID not verified.
Hi Guy,
Give mumbrella.asia a try…
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Pat (#48) and Another Admirer (#45) are spot on.
Some scammers do it because the pressure to win is the unspoken KPI global CCOs use to evaluate whether it’s time to extend or change their country CCOs.
Business results are the CEO’s KPI.
Effies are the Planners KPI.
So Cannes has become the country CCOs’.
The trouble is that Cannes is broken. Juries can be manipulated. Case studies fixed. And everyone knows its better not to ask the hard questions: Did it run? Are the results true?Can such an innovation/prototype/ambient actually work?
The hungry team does it to keep their minimum wage job.
The country CCO cracks the whip to keep his six-figure job.
The global CCO cracks his to finance his multiple mortgages.
But it’s at the level of the global holding company where the real money is.
The measure to win creative awards keeps the senior level salaries and average age low.So there’s more for the Man at the top. It’s an efficient way to control wage bills and exits can be fast tracked without legal liabilities of unfair dismissal.
The standard reaction for the agencies is to either stonewall media scrutiny until the next industry news cycle. Or if the client’s bottom-line is affected, act all indignant and mortified, and fire the teams involved.
At the end of the day, the drug mules are expendable while the puppet masters live to keep their million dollar bonuses.
Any wonder why, our industry doesn’t attract smart talent?
User ID not verified.
Why hasn’t Campaign Brief run this story?
User ID not verified.
There’s a great ‘how to guide’ on the Mumbrella Asia site all about the pressure on ECD’s to win…
User ID not verified.
At least #Darren #Davidson has officially promoted Mumbrella from “conference organiser’ to ‘marketing website’. Keep up the bad work Tim et al and he might one day call you a news site.
User ID not verified.
Good work…now can you apply a similar level of deduction and dedication to the real issues and please tell us what really went on at essendon, afl, asada, wada, dank et al? fairfax seem to be trying but not really getting there. news just want to cheerlead whoever is most popular / hard done by at any given point in time. its all digital’s fault really having killed off the funding for all the good journalism.
User ID not verified.
I think there is one clear take away from this saga and it’s this:
Ad people are terrible at PR.
User ID not verified.
Wow.
Well and truly busted it seems. I have to wonder if it even matters if they respond or not now? The silence is damming. The prestige of the competition damaged, and its failure to enforce it policies is very public. Will the Cannes Lions awards ever mean as much as they did pre-2014 again?
User ID not verified.
Kudos Tim, well done!
User ID not verified.
@Peter W – typical client attitude. It’s too good to run lol.
User ID not verified.
As an ECD trying to produce great work on paying clients in Asia, I’m despaired at the task. I understand why we resort to scam. Like I understand why people do drugs. There is an easy fix to the system…make entrants send the media schedule with the ad.
User ID not verified.
Hi Tim.
Sorry about the radio silence. Cannes is tough going so we’ve all been on vacation and didn’t really want this little hiccup to disrupt it. But seeing it has gone viral and is the talk in all agencies in APAC we’ve decided to issue a joint release:
“Yes the ads are scam. But because they definitely did run in some undisclosed media they are technically eligible. We would not have been so silly as to not cover our tracks. Ever so sorry.” Terry, Richard and Mark
User ID not verified.
wasn’t there a statement a week or so back from mcdonalds saying that the ad campaign in question ran in April and May?
if so, do they really need to supply you with a media schedule?
User ID not verified.
Is there a point to all this pathetic bitterness? Get a life you lot!
User ID not verified.
After reading Tim’s outstanding piece and most of 64 comments that followed, my faith in advertising is (ironically) higher than it has been in years.
User ID not verified.
Excellent post. Very well written, balanced and most importantly, gentle. No unnecessary sensationalism – just setting out the facts on public record and seeking a response that remains forthcoming. Thank you for investigating this – keep us posted!
User ID not verified.
i bet rebelo and browny at DDB are hoping this thing blows over once and for all over the weekend….don’t think so…everyone wants answers. Just do the right thing, come out and say they were both scam pieces respectively, give the trophies back and everyone can move on to something else
User ID not verified.
@Cam there certainly is a point. But perhaps only for someone with the attention span to read the articles and the posts. It’s like a brief really – everything you need to know is in it. Look for it.
User ID not verified.
Cam, if you bothered to read most of the comments, you would realise there are many important points to this story.
User ID not verified.
I couldn’t give two shits about scam and the halfwits who pursue them if it wasn’t for the following travesty:
People who win awards off of scam are deemed as more creative and get obscenely high salaries, while those who do good work on real briefs are ignored by the sham ECDs who see no personal benefit in hiring them.
Clients and agencies then both complain loudly about falling standards of real work and scarcity of ‘talent’.
What effin hypocrisy.
Does anyone have any proof that winning loads of awards translates to winning loads of new business pitches? I doubt it.
If so, McCann Sydney should have won billions of dollars worth of new business by now.
It’s time to stop this unfair and damaging practice once and for all….and clients should lead the way in not allowing scam on their business.
User ID not verified.
@CAM (95% probability works at DDB, 5% error margin) – you probably don’t work in advertising/marketing because if you did – you would CARE. Period. True advertising is about using creativity to move products. Not just about a witty headline. And how would you feel if Whybins or Clems or Leo’s or Droga won a CANNES LION for a supposedly, allegedly “fake” ad??? #youshouldcare #maybeadvertisingisnttherightcareer4u #thisismy(work)life
User ID not verified.
@Cam
Having to ask ‘what’s the point ?’ betrays a lot about your professional attitude and reveals more about your maturity.
Suffice to say, it’s my policy never to argue with fools.
I pity the clients who have to work with you.
User ID not verified.
@Cam. First rule of Scam Club. Don’t get caught.
User ID not verified.
Shitty hashtags aside, let me tell you the real truth.
‘You haven’t won an award in three years’ is seen as a legitimate reason to fire somebody. And if your clients aren’t buying the real, category busting, effective work that’s going to be well loved by people and juries alike, you resort to easier ways to win awards.
Most scam is pretty easy to spot. There is however a bunch of scam that isn’t so easy to spot. A single coke vending machine that bridges the gap between Pakistan and India is one very questionable example. Charity, which also includes government services is another.
There is another point. In categories like direct, promo and activation, pr and digital, results are the real difference between a finalist and a medalist. Since the last time you read a magazine, or a newspaper, clients and ECD’s alike have had little regard for the print advertising in your book. Even if it’s award winning. Outdoor, that’s still relevant.
However, there is a real solution to this. I have seen so much brilliant work presented to clients, only to not be bought for the most stupid of reasons. The easy solution, that benefits everyone is simple.
Buy better work. Your sales will go up especially if there is a big media spend behind it. You will get promoted. You will have an increase in market share. You will be liked more by your agency and by the consumer. Heck, you might even get laid more often.
Don’t blame creatives for wanting to be good. Most want their work to be seen by everyone and hear it was effective. They’re on your side. Just under enormous pressure from their bosses.
User ID not verified.
Remember in 2000 when Frank Lowe apologised for Lowe Sydney’s fake Zoo ad? The story was p3 of the Sydney Morning Herald and ran widely overseas in the trades. And the rogue CD was let go.
http://adage.com/article/news/.....ner/27673/
Nowadays, sadly, Cannes is full of hubris and the self-interest ensures all parties are unable to admit they’re complicit.
Terry, Richard and Mark are for sure reading all these comments and wanting this story to just go away. I don’t think it will. Great job Tim.
User ID not verified.
just asking a legit question again amidst the bile. Didn’t I see a statement from a Maccas client a week or so back saying that their ad ran in April and May?
User ID not verified.
@Jimmy, your’s is the nose that always knows. Very wise words there.
But there’s more truth. These ECDs load up their creative departments with potential award-winning juniors. These juniors get the occasional potential award-winning brief, but their day-to-day role is dealing with stuff the ECD doesn’t want to know about. Mundane work that is the real earner for the agency and that these kids have no idea how to address properly. They might try to give it a nice ‘awardy’ sheen but if they can’t even get that approved then they don’t give a rats. So the rest of the agency’s roster suffers in the diligent pursuit of the award-winning few.
And don’t start me on Tier-C and -D Creative Directors who chase this pipe dream without a chance of succeeding.
The Panasonic and McDonalds stuff above is really nice thinking, but what was the brief? As per the VW ad that originally used this concept, the dog idea might be appropriate as part of a larger swathe of communications building a set of benefits for an automaker. As they stand, these beautiful dog layouts are at best OEM trade journal fodder.
If Mark Lollback is so proud of this McDonald’s stuff, why is he not punching Tim in the nose with a media schedule? Are the paper folds in the layouts an attempt to make these things look genuine? At a guess, there was no brief. Just some creatives who came up with the idea and sold it into the client with the promise of Cannes partytime. Hey Mark, it’s your budget. But maybe you should have just stuck this on your office pinboard if you weren’t prepared to test it in the real world. Because it looks to me like you’ve drunk the Koolaid. Please tell me you ran this. Please tell me how successful it was so I can use it as an example when I try to sell a great idea without a logo.
So what’s the real harm? A single discarded confectionery wrapper doesn’t destroy the environment. A single insider trade doesn’t put anyone out of their home. A single scam ad doesn’t harm any babies. But the compounding effect certainly compromises what little integrity we creatives have when we try to sell in genuinely good work. Work that might actually produce results for the client.
No, I’m not bitter about someone’s inflated salary. I’ve earned good money in this game and someone is always going to be earning more than me. No, I’m not spewy I’ve missed another party. I’ve partied well and good and will continue to do so. Yes, I’m pissed of that this hypocrisy undermines merit-based excellence in this industry.
You’re right about creatives wanting to do the best work they can, Jimmy. But somewhere along the way, this whole awards thing distorted the process beyond recognition. Things shifted from ‘recognition for great work’ to become the justification for forcing clients into work they don’t really need.
Without the commercial imperative, the ads featured in this article are nothing more than very, very expensive memes for a very, very select audience. And the rest of us in this game – both agencyside and clientside – have to suffer the by-product of this folly.
User ID not verified.
Love how The Oz called this BORING and UNIMPORTANT but covered the ipad incident with Mail Online for 7 days, as clearly that was important world changing news.
Good work Tim – the attention from D2 means Newscorp obviously view Mumbrella as a threat, as all that is covered within its pages are either negative competitor pieces or positive Newscorp related company pieces.
User ID not verified.
@me, agree with you whole-heartedly, but I think you’ve missed my point.
The onus isn’t on the individuals doing scam to change. Personally I’ve managed to have a great career as a creative without doing any. That doesn’t make me good, it just makes me very lucky. The awards thing is driven by clients ultimately. They select agencies based on how many awards they’ve won. And they know it will lead to them being promoted.
The onus is on clients buying better ads. It benefits everyone.
Be brave. I’ve seen Marketing directors become CMO’s then become MD’s off the back of a great, real, award winning (and successful) campaigns.
As an aside, I’m sure both the ads in question would resonate and be far more powerful in front of a consumer than a save $2.99 ad. Why? Because juries are people too. And not particularly clever. That’s why they work in creative.
Peace out.
User ID not verified.
Tim, kudos for the respectful approach when the outcome of your inquiries could be devastating for the recipients of your message. You, like Terry at Cannes, also must maintain a professional relationship with people/agencies for whom you may earn future revenue.
Jumping to a possible solution for this problem at Cannes (and possibly all creative awards) I noticed that one of the entry rules states – “The Festival reserves the right to request a full media schedule from each entrant company to verify the authenticity of the entry in the event that entry is shortlisted or a winner.”
Surely it wouldn’t be onerous to include a validated media schedule with each entry. The media agency should co-sign the entry form to affirm their role in placing the ad. Alternatively, it’s not hard to include a photograph if the ad in the newspaper/magazine.
A solution to the ongoing suspicion over what is/isn’t a scam ad could be dealt with if there was a will. That is the real issue that Tim has so eloquently exposed – again.
User ID not verified.
Tim and Miranda, great investigative work here. Gotta keep the bastards honest (as they say).
There is one question I’d like to get to the bottom of though…
Was Miranda really unwell that day, or was that just a scam?
User ID not verified.
Hi Chappy,
Thanks for the feedback.
Yep, definitely at home sick that day – I managed to pick up a stomach bug making its way around Sydney…
Cheers,
Miranda
Greta work by Tim and Miranda, pretty soon you’ll be snapped up by one of our major Media outlets to provide them with hard hitting investigative journalissss…. oh right…. as you were 🙂
User ID not verified.
Hi mumbrella. Have you heard anything more? I’m sure everyone involved is hoping it will blow over, but I think all here are keen to hear the response.
User ID not verified.
Aren’t all awards pretty baloney anyways? who cares if they ran or not? if they are to be judged against their results then why is there creative effectiveness awards?
User ID not verified.
Finger on the pulse, Tim!
How much can we really trust these award systems?
Is merit defined by creativity or wealth these days?
User ID not verified.
In the end, it will blow away and be forgotten. The ad boys get to keep their Lions and the show makes Terry and the rest of us a load of money. Keep scamming mates. This thing will never stop. (edited under Mumbrella’s comment moderation policy) Have your little investigation then go find another scam to chase. Must be a few others no doubt.
User ID not verified.
@Terry’s P.A. You’re probably right, but with your boss still to front up to the Creative Fuel conference, he’s probably going to cop a few awkward questions. Maybe there are media schedules, maybe they have run legitimately, but there is still the vexing question of the dog concept’s many lives. This internetty thing ensures this story hangs around like a mosquito that made its way into your 5 star hotel room and keeps buzzing in your ear.
User ID not verified.
Advertising , marketing, branding is all there at the end of the day to sell a product or service. Creatives hate this fact and so to them they would actually prefer it if their very original idea was used God forbid in a regional newspaper. Or their really clever TV ad went on air in the ad break on Today Tonight. I think Google, Facebook etc sold their service very well without a Creative Director in sight. There is an awful lot of dross out there.
User ID not verified.
Great piece, well done Tim.
Often the problem in this world isn’t that the rules aren’t in place but that they’re not enforced.
Please keep on this. Demand answers. How about a reminder at the top of the mUmBRELLA front page with a counter from when you posed the questions until they’re satisfactorily answered?
User ID not verified.
Hi Tim,
Great piece. Really intriguing and appreciate you asking those hard and potentially uncomfortable questions.
You’ll have to excuse my lack of knowledge into the Cannes entry process, but I was wondering whether clients nominate the work or does the agency?
In the case of these two pieces, did the client accept the award or did the agency?
I only ask the question because both clients seem to have come under a fair amount of scrutany in the article and on the surface one could argue that both agencies have escaped quite lightly in comparison – minus one photo and a couple of name mentions.
Interested to get your thoughts…
User ID not verified.
Hi Curious,
Thanks for the kind words. According to the Lions rules (http://www.canneslions.com/ent.....ral_rules/), “entries cannot be made without the prior permission of the client”. Anecdotally, what sometimes happens – although I’m not saying it happened in this case – is that clients get a panicked call after the event being asked to back up an agency’s claims when an awards organiser attempts verification.
Terry Savage did originally offer to speak to us after July 7 (which as you may notice has now been and gone) – that’s one question I’d be happy to ask him more about if he does choose to make himself available.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Tim, you could always buy a ticket to Creative Fuel and ask Terry and Mark together in person. After all, they’re both speaking on what it takes to win a Lion…. Seems like the perfect opportunity.
User ID not verified.
Maybe Terry will answer questions when entry numbers to his show drop.
I mean, really, why would you enter?
User ID not verified.
Thanks Tim. Really appreciate your quick reply.
I was thinking a bit about this yesterday, especially as to how I’d handle it if I were a client in this scenario. Perhaps we could assume by the lack of response, that there is something a bit dodgy going on – as I’m sure both agency and client would have sent through a media plan quick as a flash for all to see, if it were legit.
But on the other hand, most clients I know would have real difficulty throwing the agency under the bus and admitting the ad never ran. Firstly, because of the damage to a potentially strong relationship which may have yielded some great creative (that actually ran!) over the years. But add to that, potential relationships higher up the food chain at CEO or Board level, which would definitely dictate to the clients inability to speak out – even if they wanted to.
Very tough scenario – probably hence the silence.
While I’m sure the client has a serious part to play in all of this, I can’t help but feel like it’s up to the agencies involved to step up and do the right thing – if not for their clients sake. Which is why I sent the original note suggesting this story could have been aimed more at the agencies rather than clients.
Again, congrats on a great piece. I always enjoy it when you take an investigative journalism approach to something like this, beyond just reporting on new ads.
Cheers.
User ID not verified.
The silence is deafening.
The only sound louder is the dying cries of the credibility of all involved.
Agency. Client. Creative team.
It’s a lose-lose-lose situation.
The only real consequence is that nobody is gonna get an increment, promotion or bonus out of this debacle.
Which was the only real objective in mind.
User ID not verified.
I’m following the convo, but self-moderating under my new brand karma rules
User ID not verified.
Any update Tim? Would be nice to close this one out.. I suspect the old, ‘head in sand, it’ll go away’ PR approach is being used.
User ID not verified.
And still nothing?
Well, I think we can pretty much write Cannes off as having any credibility.
Perhaps put your Lion on display next to Ben Johnson’s Olympic gold medal, a framed yellow vest signed by Lance Armstrong, and a Platinum record by Milli Vanilli.
User ID not verified.
That’s right guys, sit tight, say nothing…..it will all go away. 24 hour cycle, tomorrow fish n chips and all that. Lubly chubly.
User ID not verified.
Following this from Singapore where the agencies are running really lean teams. Puts all the good work most of the Aussie industry does to shame.
User ID not verified.
As someone who watches most journalists reprint stories from the daily mail this investigation is thrilling. Real journalism, thorough, researched. It’s inspiring that Mr Burrowes has the balls to keep at this. Woodward/Bernstein etc etc – this kind of journalism keeps large corporations who are increasingly influential on government policy, accountable. Thank you. Fight the good fight.
User ID not verified.
There should be a Cannes category for ‘high standards of investigative journalism’..
Gold Lion in the wings for Tim & Mumbrella !
User ID not verified.
Wow. Great piece with some genuine questions backed by some genuine investigation. Tone was entertaining and walked the line between ‘truth in jest’ and outright accusation really well. Both enjoyable and enlightening.
User ID not verified.