An open letter to the staff of DDB Sydney and Saatchi & Saatchi Sydney

Good for you Tim, look for answers wherever they may be hiding. Plenty here will be miffed and offended that you are going after agency staffers but the greater good here is to get to the truth. And frankly, anyone whose name is on an entry is fair game if it’s potentially scam.

Don’t let the issue die due to the arrogant silence from the senior guys.

The industry needs to prove it doesn’t tolerate scam ads.

Tim – I noticed that there’s a typo in your email address it should read: tim@fecalattractions. com.au

Tim, great points raised and I’d guess the silence points to guilt. That said, there may well be a perfectly good explanation for it, with which the marcomms community waits with bated breath. However you promised me you wouldn’t use that terrible American affectation ‘reached out’ ever again. Lo and behold we see it here. To use another loathesome American affectation – what gives?

It’s both awesome and rare to see real investigative journalism in an industry rag.

Keep at it guys.I’m looking forward to the next installment of Cannesgate.

As a “regular punter” being subjected to these adverts, or at least, as the potential target audience, I’d like to be able to be shown the product I’m missing, that’s won accolades. How can one win an award on unexposed advertising/marketing? Oxymoron. So, good on you Tim for letting us know of inconsistencies and contradictions.

Aren’t you missing the point? Isn’t this all about creativity and big ideas? Shouldn’t we be celebrating work like this regardless of the media spend behind it?

Tim, you are starting to look sad and desperate.

You asked Terry for a final verdict. He gave it. Alas, it didn’t go your way. (Probably didn’t help that you pointed out how much money Cannes makes. Jealous, much?)

Now this?

Seriously dude, you’ve got to know when to let things go.

Tim, you are continuing to look strong and handsome.

You asked Terry for an explanation. He gave you the runaround. Alas for him , he’s coming your way. (Probably doesn’t help that you pointed out he’s at Creative Fuel on the 28th. Anticipating, much?)

Now this?

Seriously dude, you’ve got to wonder whether Terry is going to be a no-show or a no-questions-please?

Tim, there’s a line between investigative journalism and witch-hunting – and this piece crosses it. Is continuing to question the credibility of these individuals (in a way that smacks of bullying and desperation) worth compromising your own?

It is beyond inappropriate to call out the hard-working staff of the two agencies in question. Shame on you for this sanctimonious crusade, it’s not exactly Watergate. Next I expect there’s going to be an expose on media agencies getting taken out to lunch on Fridays? If you are 100% committed to seeing this non-story come to some sort of conclusion, I expect you will apply equal rigour, analysis, and scrutiny to every award-winning campaign since this website has been publishing around these parts. I expect this year’s Mumbrella awards are going to be a pretty quiet affair.

This is not sad and desperate. Tim is pursuing an answer that many people here want. It’s the silence of the parties involved that is sad and desperate.

seriously. they are just commercials. who gives a shit?

Alice,
If it would be about creativity only then what’s the point of having Cannes. Just go to Sotheby’s or Tate.
After 3 decades I’ve gradually seen large groups of scammers rise up the ranks of great agencies, receiving huge salaries. Sounds good for the agency that hires them; so creative, look at all the gold that glitters! Give those scammers a proper brief with a real problem to solve and they all fail. No wonder “real” advertising looks like sh*t the past 2 decades, and agencies lost the trust of their clients.
South America and Asia are scam-paradise and Cannes happily hands out Loins en gros to them. So when you are in your first world agency’s cubicle you dream of having that moment of glory too. A temptation that should be resisted and not be honoured.
It’s not about media spend but about playing fair. Real clients, real briefs, real budgets, real media placement, real campaigns, real results.
After all, advertising is applied arts & craft to ensure clients selling there stuff. Not to win a Lion and behave like friggin rock stars.

Tim, please under no circumstances let this go. ‘Jesus wept’ is clearly a junior and immature creative who can’t see that letting this go would just prove once and for all that the advertising industry doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously. Why is having integrity “sad and desperate”. Jesus would indeed weep.

Tim very exciting to see some investigative journalism here. Though not sure if you’ll ever be invited to Saatchis or DDBs Xmas parties ever again. At the same time, I think we get the point. And if Cannes Lions aren’t going to revoke the awards, it’s not like an audience vote is going to change their minds? Or will it. I guess you’re pointing out the credibility of Cannes… and this does affect their brand.

I’m no longer as impressed by a Cannes piece of work anymore actually – especially since I hated DUMB WAYS TO DIE. Uh…

Tim since you have a record of the people who worked on it, maybe you can just email them yourself???

For years I have played the award game against multinationals that entered ‘unique work’ yet we held our own. Now why bother? The price of entry is so high. Everyone is agency of the year. And some Brazilian who can’t score a goal is the next creative superstar. Forgiven the rant, but the maccas ads were on best ads or some other major adsite before being in the the ‘manly daily’ or some such other major publication that a certain agency (whoever they may be) loves to book. To get to the point, and Tim you’ve nailed it, they are scam and everyone is hiding. But no one takes the fall these days, in case you hadn’t noticed, so you have revealed the emperors but looking at these sad Middle aged naked tricksters is not pleasant for anybody….

There are several issues that need to be addressed:

Does a Cannes’ winning ad need to be media placed and what’s that definition?

Should a creative awarded ad that wasn’t media placed be revoked?

What responsibility does an agency have to defend it’s awards?

Can I just say that any ad submission to be awarded needs to be created by the agency, approved by the client, and placed in a media channel, before it is judged as an ad.

@Jesus Wept ‘Seriously dude’, it’s his job.
He is a journalist. This is how he pays the mortgage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist

You are literally telling him to know when to stop doing his job.

Go Tim. Wish someone would do this in South Africa. It’s rare that winning work is actually real. Particularly for the NGO campaigns. Most of those never happened. The videos cost m

As an Aussie expat looking from afar at this unfolding I want to say that I am always proud when I come across a piece of work from home which is brilliant AND has driven sales/brand for the client. And no matter whether that work is driven by a creative agency or a media agency or is by someone I know or a complete stranger. It’s good to see the creativity and discipline of my fellow country men being recognised. So in this case it is particularly galling when work which while clever but has had no impact upon sales is rewarded. It goes against why clients pay us and why people should be working in this industry. It’s fake. So go Tim.

And what’s with the personal attacks on Tim using an alias?

Surely everyone’s aware that the whole thing is a silly charade to begin with though, right? Who cares…

Terry Savage, DDB Sydney and Saatchi Sydney thought this would just go away a week ago.

It hasn’t.

Well done Tim.

Great journalistic instincts and relentless pursuit.

Could this be Mumbrella’s first Walkley?

I know we’re media, but surely we can follow the birdie. The issue is whether the rules have been breached, not whether we agree with them. BTW, nice work on the first ad.

Awesome initiative tim. This whole issue would be resolved if awards were given based on the results of advertising against client objectives rather than funny beer ads for brand ? that nobody can recall.

Tim, Last night you named the staff of DDB and Saatchi’s in your article. Overnight it seems you’ve taken the names off the article. Maybe you realised what a low move it was to go after staffers?
This is just really bad taste. Naming and shaming the hard working individuals at the agencies. Why didn’t you just email them if you had the names?
I also really wonder since when is Mumbrella the ultimate authority on legitimacy of work in COMPETITOR’s award shows? Cannes clearly responded to you and ruled the work to be legitimate so why are you harping on about this?

When scam ads win awards it means real ads, for real clients, with real briefs, don’t. You’re not cheating the system, you’re cheating your mates, colleagues and contemporaries.

From a business point of view I am all for scams. It separates the men from the boys.
Everyone can see that. Especially serious minded clients.
In the last 12 years, the agency I worked for racked up millions in new business simply by targeting clients who got duped by incumbents who abused their brand for awards with one-offs.
Yes- it was in Asia.
These clients were sick and tired of agencies who partied hard on pro bono wins and nowhere to be found for the bread & butter work. In fact these creative teams couldn’t wait to jump ship when their new fame brought new job offers.
Our new business pitch was that we will never bother clients to endorse work done for awards.
Like abused wives, these clients gladly gave us their business and respect.
Best of all, we still managed to win awards with real work. Effie’s, honest silvers,bronzes and finalists at the creative competitions.
It just took longer and harder.
Real success comes when you put in the effort and hard yards.
Those who think short term will never last. The truth is that the only people who care about awards are ad folks reading the trades.
The senior clients care about whether the summer campaign was on time, on budget and how well it worked.

Well said Geoff Ingall.

Spot on.

Keep going Tim, it is a disgrace to enter work that is not real for what are held to be the industry’s highest awards.

As a client who made my fair share of changes to ads, how can you compare work that has been through client teams, legal teams, compliance teams with work that is just a concept. It’s not fair.

And as for the people claiming naming names is unfair. Which of those named are NOT going to use the fake awards on their CVs?

And get a job ahead of someone without a similar award. THAT is not fair my friends.

Maybe the digital community should start entering websites and digi campaigns that never went live… What a complete joke this is. Isn’t the main issue here deceiving your client?? Throwing unapproved advertising work around with gay abandon?

Tim why did you take the names out of the article. And do you think you should be transparent and cross them out so we can see the article had been modified (in line with your editorial policies).

I think this is great that you are trying to chase down an answer.

It’s not anything against DDB or Saatchi or even Cannes lions. It’s just that I’m sure everyone wants it to stop and this is a great initiative.

This absolutely needs to be solved. If, for nothing else, the sake of integrity and value of the awards and recognition themselves. From here, its a slippery slope to submitting unapproved or rejected work, just because it may have been beautifully innovative but for whatever reason, rejected by the client. Looking forward to an outcome.

why won’t anyone involved with these ads just come out and say “ok, these ads are not scam, here’s the proof, now please stop writing about us”?

if these ads are legit it would take five minutes to squash the story

instead it’s been going for weeks with “no comment” the consistent response

not sure DDB, Saatchis or Cannes will lose any dollars over this, but they sure are losing some industry capital

nice one tim.

if you’re going to pursue something then damn right pursue every angle.

in fact, i think the people claiming credit for these ads should have been the first ones to go under the microscope.

its clear that both of these are scammy as hell and their ‘no comment’ tactics need to be called out.

no ad should win anything unless its achieved what it was supposed to, which in this case, was to sell burgers and cars.

/popcorn

This is great!

Tim don’t give up on this. Ad leaders need to grow up, hire, promote and reward for the right reasons. Advertising is a business, in which ethics and accountability should apply, and currently leaders are instilling a culture of rule breaking, envy, childishness, etc. Thousands – literally – of creatives globally struggle with this, so keep going.

Tim you’re a knob head.

(Edited under Mumbrella’s comment moderation policy – unable to verify the claim being made – but feel free to email with more info)

How about using you journalistic skills to figure out which one of the many accusing articles I’m referring to.
And in my opinion the work above is very good, congratulations to all involved.

@seek

no one is denying they are ‘good’ (so good the dog one was done already), that’s not the point. the point is they both won advertising awards despite the fact they’ve not been used to advertise anything.

props for your witty insults though!

Don’t let the name calling get to you Tim.
Reasonable readers applaud your determination.
Wear the insults as a badge of honour.
Journalism is writing what others rather you not write about
Everything else is PR.

The names need to be on this article. It is all fun and games until somebody his held accountable right. The ECD in the very least needs to answer for the agency. Funny how all the creative guys run and hide when it’s time to get infamous. Thing is, they all know this will blow over. Even Terry says so to his mates as we know. This little article will blow away and we are on again to next year. More scams, more fake work from Australia and Singapore and more money to line Terry’s fat pockets. The bottom line here is that Cannes like all shows needs these scam entries to make money. And they make a ****load of money. Good on you mate for calling these agency credit mongers out. Have they answered? Or have they just threatened you to remove their names?

Interesting article, but who really cares? Our industry is in turmoil. Building temples on sand. Scam ads exist because we didn’t make it less transient industries. Directors, screenwriters, artists, authors, et al.

@ seek, you’re a knob head! Jesus wept, yes you’re an even bigger immature knob head! Creating ads just for awards rather than meeting a client’s need is a prime example why this industry has too many greedy and unethical morons. Good luck Tim!

The trouble with today’s ‘it’s not my fault’ generation is they always never fail to play the victim card.
Those names named knew perfectly well what they were doing.
Lance Armstrong’s ‘other people cheat too’ defence didn’t wash either.
Everyone involved in these obvious scams should be ashamed of themselves.
Not for cheating. But for doing such a piss poor job at it.
If these children wanna play the creative game like the pros, grow a pair and cheat smart.
It really isn’t that difficult.
Any idiot can do it. And many have.

Well done, Tim.
Huge kudos for following this one up with the agencies.

Exciting stuff

Hey Tim
Your continued expose on scams will bear fruit.
Maybe not today but in future award shows.
Clients will will be more wary of ‘approving’ one-off ads.
Agencies will definitely have to work harder and invest an acceptable amount of media money to camoflauge their scams.
Nett-nett. Less money for entries. Less entry fees for the organizers.
Start benchmarking this year’s number of entries from Oz.
I bet, there will be a huge drop next year.

if i came 3rd or 4th in this comp, i’d be asking some qs !

Name any other industry that is so insecure that it has a needs to enter up to 20 different awards with a continuing array of scams to congratulate itself. Why has the industry become so precious with such a huge sense of overvaluing itself. Shallow as a car-park puddle!

Mumbrella, please post their IPs. Pretty sure most of them would be coming out of the same two offices.

Also everyone complaining about targeting the staff? You SHOULD feel targeted. Scam is the fault of everyone who works on it. If you don’t agree with helping push through a job that the client doesn’t approve to spend media on it, then say something. Otherwise learn how to defend your decisions. Don’t just get pissy when you’re called out on it. If you’re willing to have your name on the credits, then you should be willing to receive the flack as well.

Good on you Tim. I remember you calling out Express Newspapers on rebate deals around 10 years ago. Glad to see you’e not gone soft.

Tim, please keep the pressure on. I’m a creative. Brilliant work is what keeps me motivated – the thought of making something that actually changes real people’s behaviour, gives them pause for thought, actually infiltrates the culture. If it doesn’t do that, it’s commercially worthless. It’s failed to satisfy its own reasons for existing. And yet we keep holding up these worthless pieces of work as the epitome of our industry… it’s no wonder the world thinks we’re self-obsessed wankers.

Brilliant work. Keep going.

So some people (agency types I think , no really) are saying “just let it go”….”time to move on”…”this is a witch hunt”…”worse things happening in adland” etc etc..
All Tim is asking is a perfectly reasonable question.
” Where did these ads run?”
How hard can it be to answer ?

Seriously. Still self-righteously prattling on about this?! If the client and the award organisers have answered your questions, isn’t it time to drop this ridiculously boring vendetta?
There are so many more important issues out there, yet another rehash of the scam-or-not-scam debate is just tedious.
And no, I don’t work in an ad agency, let alone DDB or Saatchis.
@Deborah – of course the world thinks adlanders are self-obsessed wankers and this tirade is feeding right into it.

i rarely go onto these sites anymore cause most of it is BS.

to call Tim’s pursuit of this story BS is the real BS.

keeping it real. good on you Tim. what else is there?

The sad thing is that the client is obviously in on it as well. They dont have the guts to approve brilliant creative work like this in ‘real life’ but will happily approve the awards entry in a mystery publication thatnooneshalleversee. We all know the ‘approved’ version of these ads would have a price point, star burst, potato stamp, URL, QR code or facebook activation. Bet the client is now blaming the agency for their supposed fk up.

Go Tim, finish what you started

We advertisers want this to serve as a lesson to all scam-inclined agencies

for anyone to suggest that any ad award should be given to a campaign that doesn’t legitimately air is absolutely ludicrous

it’s bad enough that every creative award doesn’t also require effectiveness to be clearly and objectively demonstrated/proven

McDonalds need to be held to account too, because they would have permitted the media placement in Rouse Hill Times

wow – now we do see some brand karma happening – but as a self-moderator that’s all I can say on this (you know what I mean TB)

yep, investigative journalism in Oz is still alive and pricking the balloons that perpetrate such palpable fraud.

I wonder if Murdoch’s Australian operations would appreciate such sleuthing…

So… why DIDN”T these award winning ads get placed in mainstream media to flog their wares? Are they no good as ads?

Great stuff Tim. Don’t let go.

If they’re scam, either the awards should be given back or taken back.

If they’re legit, and the best creatives in the international advertising community say they’re among the best ads produced this past year, then it’s an astonishing display of arrogance for the clients not to deem them worthy of wider use.

Ah this is excellent. While the hipsters boast in the Gutter bar about their radio ad that flighted at 2am on a Sunday, heard by two stoners and a dog, the team who sent clients’ sales up by 200 percent with a strong but not ‘creative enough’ campaign get congratulated in a group mail in their crappy office. It comes down to greed, ego, and a broken system perpetuated by the people at the top. Pathetic, really.

It’s worth pointing out that Panasonic ad is far from original too.

This ran in 2008 – DDB in Dublin, ironically enough.

http://files2.coloribus.com/fi.....-91770.jpg

From the posts on this thread it is clear that this investigation is making people uncomfortable.

Awards bring in business and that means revenue for the winners. There is also the downside for genuine entries that should have won.

Keep at it Tim, and you could win a Walkley!

DB

I guess you have to start somewhere, and it’s looking highly likely that these two campaigns aren’t really within the spirit (or perhaps even the letter) of the rules… but 90% (my made-up number based on observation) of all work in Print in shows is scam.

that doesn’t make it right to cheat the system, but a couple of aussie entries is just the tip of the iceberg. Print awards are dominated by entire countries whose agencies AND clients are totally in on the game. Fake work everywhere.

I’d LOVE for this investigation to go GLOBAL. Tim, I wonder if there are any journalists in other markets who are willing to go with you on this one. Probably not, but that’s really what it needs. Because shining a light on a couple of bronze and silver winners from Oz won’t change the shows at all. South America, Dubai, India, SE Asia… this is where the vast majority of fake work is coming from.

In the meantime, my advice: totally ignore the print categories when you’re judging the worth of awards. Practically none of the winning stuff is real. Plenty of real work in the other categories though.

@AdGuy how about ignoring the agencies involved when making up pitch lists too. You don’t want the bad karma coming to your company.

The longer you run this story the more exposure these ads get. So the more legit they become.

As long as advertising agencies continue to derive their self esteem from the ability to win awards, scam award entries will persist.

Every time I see a criticism of Tim pursuing this matter, I think: either this person works for one of the scammer agencies or they have done something similar in the past. I can’t fathom any other reason why they wouldn’t think an obvious scam win was worth pursuing. Or why they would care about it not just going away.

Why do you moderate comments but make your own public accusations?

I would submit that those attacking the legitimacy of this article and the persistence of the follow-up might just be involved. Especially those trading under pseudonym.

For what it’s worth, I’m totally supportive of your persistence on this Tim and team. Good luck.

Thanks

Would it be safe to say that many agencies favour print, still, in 2014 to digital, because they can charge exorbitant production costs to their clients and pick up big kick backs from publishers, in terms of commissions?

Do many agencies still have old school business models = are fleecing clients?

@No, comment 67: “The longer you run this story the more exposure these ads get. So the more legit they become.”
What a load of bollocks. The more you say something is a scam and prove it to be true among an industry audience does not sell one Big Mac or car air conditioner. It just gives the agency and client a bad name. And as for ‘more exposure’, come on, it’s hardly the Rouse Hill Times, is it? 🙂
According to your logic, running news stories on Nigerian online scams would result in people thinking they are not scams at all, but something wonderful to be embraced and invested in.
Come on Tim, let’s have some of that IP address naming and shaming that Mumbrella is famous for!

@AdGuy
All winning entries worldwide coming from Indonesia, except for one calendar design, have been total and complete scam.

The ads ran. They ran to the standards of Cannes. Maybe not to the standards of Mumbrella, who I’m sure have a far more vigorous awards show. But to the standard of Cannes, they’re all legit.

Now I know Mumbrella won’t publish this comment, but if they think they are above Cannes and that Cannes standards are too low, then that’s an issue between Mumbrella and Cannes. Not an issue with any of the agencies, staff or clients who have been singled out and hounded.

Talk about fairness, some peoples livelihoods will suffer because of this witch hunt. And I bet as surely as this comment won’t appear, or won’t appear in it’s entirety, there won’t be any apology or compensation forthcoming from Focal Attractions for the damage they have caused these individuals and companies.

I know about five ads from my country that won at Cannes this year which were all ‘scam’. One of them won really big in its category and the ad ran twice. Is that acceptable at Cannes, as the above comment suggests? Just trying to work out exactly what’s acceptable – I’ll go read the rules.

If the issue is about media placement and how many times the ads have run, is that the agencies fault or the media companies?

Should advertising agencies take media back in-house to avoid these things happening in the future?

This article itself will do more to stop scams than anything else. Agencies will be wary of being the next case study on here. The only shame is the rest of the world will continue to scam it up. Australia is probably one of the lesser offenders compared to some other countries.

Sigh – tedious…

I’m faintly amused that much of the rhetoric here is promulgated by writers using nom-de-plumes.

In other words, lots of crap about authenticity and identity is written by folks hiding behind fake names.

I always use my real name – it does two things: one it makes me responsible for what I write and two, it makes me think twice before writing stuff that’s a bit dubious.

And the message to agencies? “As you are in little things, so will you be in big things.”

How can a deceitful agency expect to be trusted, even if the deceit is a small one?

I agree.
I have been watching this debate unfold,
but quite frankly – rules are rules.
If the ads in question fall inside the competition rules, then that should
be enough said. If Mumbrella is not happy with the rules of the comp, they should
take it up with Cannes.
Lets face it – this whole thing has just been click bait to give this
publication it’s read quota.
At the end of the day, I believe the publication of Mumbrella, and
the individual reporters themselves owe the agencies and the
creatives involved an apology.
Let’s see if they’re big enough to do that. Doubt it…
journalists seem to be exempt from common decency.
And for the record, I have nothing to do with any parties involved.

Hi Alex,
I have read all the relevant articles.
Again, I say rules are rules.
If you would like to collaborate with Cannes and create the “spirit of Cannes” rules, well that’s fine. In the meantime, I stand by my thoughts re an apology.

So know that we’re focussing on spirit, it appears the ‘spirit’ of Mumbrella is to make money at the expense of other peoples livelihoods.

Isn’t part of the achievement, aside from the creative work, is the ability for the idea to be successful with the client? Isn’t that half the battle?

Client schmient @Brent. All the achievement should come from the work generating the desired response from the target audience.

The basis of awards is the universally-held belief that better creative work will be more likely to generate that desired response.

@Micheal
Correction: Mumbrella’s spirit isn’t about making money at the expense of other people’s livelihoods.
It’s calling out people who build their livelihood on questionable practises.
I believe its called journalism.