Shortlisted Cannes Lions ads ran once, in local parenting mag
An ad created by JWT Sydney for Johnson & Johnson which was shortlisted for this year’s Press Lions in Cannes, ran just once in a free local parenting magazine, Mumbrella can reveal.
Readers had raised questions about JWT’s campaign for J&J’s Banlice which made the shortlist for the Press category in Cannes.
The tip-offs came after Mumbrella revealed yesterday that ads entered into the award show by JWT for J&J’s Band-Aid only appeared in the same edition of The Rouse Hill Times as controversial Bronze winning McDonald’s executions. The newspaper is understood to be News Local’s cheapest advertising outlet.
JWT today confirmed to Mumbrella the two ads, called “Bridge” and “Cable Car”, ran in free parenting magazine Sydney’s Child, which has an audited circulation of 117,000 and is part of a national network of localised Child magazines, in February. The agency said it also ran as a transit outdoor execution.
A spokesperson for JWT claimed the reason the campaign ran in just place was that it was “extremely targeted to ensure maximum ROI”. The two ads ran as 1/3 pages on page 10 and 19 of the magazine, which has a rate card price of $4,438 each.
Based on normal agency and photography costs, it is likely that the cost of producing the ad greatly exceeded the cost of running it in the magazine.
The spokesperson said: “The campaign was developed as a very targeted back to school February campaign, and was only placed in Sydney’s Child Magazine – not national – because of low media spend, and the fact that Sydney is the product’s largest target market due to population. It ran once because it was a ‘back to school’ campaign and it ran in the February ‘back to school’ edition of Sydney’s Child.”
The ads are the fourth set entered by Australian agencies in this year’s Cannes competition to come under scrutiny, with Saatchi & Saatchi’s Silver Lion winning work for Panasonic, DDB’s Bronze winning McDonald’s executions and JWT’s Band-Aid work also in the spotlight.
The issue of “scam” ads is a growing one for the advertising industry, with claims that some work is created to win awards, rather than solve clients’ marketing problems. A hallmark of scam advertising is when work for a major brand appears only once, in a low cost publication, close to an entry deadline.
JWT claims the Banlice executions were in response to a client brief from Johnson & Johnson for the brand. JWT said that it booked the ad directly “due to low media spend”. J&J’s media agency of record is OMD.
At the time of posting, Mumbrella had been unable to confirm what size the ads ran in the magazine, but a half-page advert in Sydney’s Child costs $6,501 including GST according to its rate card.
JWT has also said an ad for Johnson & Johnson worming brand Combantrin which won a Bronze Lion in the inaugural Cannes Health awards this year, ran online with the Google Network and also ran on Seven in Queensland, “due to high product usage in this area”. However, an initial search by media monitoring service Ebiquity which covers all of Australia’s metro TV networks, has not uncovered the ad running.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoW8Tjz8xvY
Johnson & Johnson has refused to comment, referring inquiries from Mumbrella back to JWT.
Meanwhile, Mumbrella has still been unable to find evidence of Saatchi & Saatchi Sydney’s winning campaign for Panasonic in-car air conditioning. We welcome all information via anonymous email if preferred to alex@focalattractions.com.au.
Alex Hayes
Don’t bullshit a bullshitter.
User ID not verified.
Gold diggers
User ID not verified.
Eastwood will clean out the creative department anyway when he starts as global CCO
User ID not verified.
Hi Alex, how many times does a print ad need to run for you to not write a story about it?
User ID not verified.
Over it.
User ID not verified.
press releases with headlines like ‘JWT Appoints Award Winning xxx’ no longer have any credibility then.
User ID not verified.
Well this is getting pathetic. Stop trying to undermine every creative who has done well. They said it ran, leave it alone.
User ID not verified.
Clients are so gutless that
in order not to suicide,
you have to do scam ads.
User ID not verified.
I’m fucking over it!!!!!!!!!!! it didn’t win a Cannes lion or anything…. I’m over it!!!!
User ID not verified.
Once the heat is off me I’m all for ICAC following this caper up
User ID not verified.
I like both the Banlice and the Combantrin ads. Wish the clients did more with them.
User ID not verified.
JWT has also said an ad for Johnson & Johnson worming brand Combantrin….also ran on Seven in Queensland, “due to high product usage in this area”
So alongside the Big Pineapple, the Big Prawn and the Big Banana can we can look forward to the Big Threadworm being the next big QLD tourist attraction
User ID not verified.
So topical ads are out too Mumbrella?
One-off pieces of outdoor?
What about Coke machines?
User ID not verified.
if they ran, they ran.
I’m not sure of the exact Cannes rules but I certainly know that some of the campaigns my teams won awards for over the years ran in tiny media schedules too. And some that we paid for ourselves.
I also know that many of the executions that do run with extensive media schedules have awards versions submitted that have been subtly or extensively changed from the versions that ran – be it longer format, different art direction, changed end frames etc.
I don’t have some brilliant conclusion (surprise!) for this and it does all feel slightly distasteful, but that is the world that creative awards live in and while it is a great thing for you to shine a light on agencies or advertisers who may be breaking the rules, if most others are bending the same rules to bring themselves a competitive advantage, I think we have to judge the system as a whole and not the individuals or the agencies themselves.
Wendy – have you cheated in the past? If you are a cheat you are a loser not a winner. A cheat knows in their heart that they are useless people. Useless to anybody or any company.
Thats just the way life is.
Ogilvy would never cheat, just look at their comments on cheating: http://adsoftheworld.com/media.....dvertising
User ID not verified.
Thanks Eddie….I agree. Bring in ICAC!
User ID not verified.
The much bigger question than that of scam is this – why such a huge disconnect between the ‘award-winning’ creative work these agencies do for minimal exposure, and the ‘wallpaper’ creative work the clients actually place their media budget behind.
Who is right?
Have agencies lost the ability to convince clients of what is great (maybe because of our misguided drive to win awards), or have clients lost the will to fight for what is great.
Or is what runs good enough to keep everyone happy and not rock the boat. I’ve often thought many marketers approach advertising as if they are spending money already made (cost), not spending to make more money (investment).
And on top of all of this – why the mind-numbingly tiresome pitch parade that these marketers keep conducting only to get wallpaper produced at the end of the process. I’m sure fantastic award-worthy ideas are presented in the pitch, and get the agency the gig, but what the client really needed was an efficient production studio to execute the ads from overseas head office.
No wonder this industry is on the slippery slope.
User ID not verified.
I now come to this website for a laugh. It’s becoming the daily telegraph for ‘marketing.’
User ID not verified.
Aussie agencies are being shortlisted/winning awards and all you can do is pick apart their credibility? Just congratulate them and move on… Or find some overseas agencies to scrutinise, let’s stick up for our own!
User ID not verified.
Happens a lot in OOH each Feb / March. Outdoor owners get calls from creative agencies to erect an ad for a couple of hours so they can photograph it and submit it for awards. Morally corrupt
User ID not verified.
A day will come…not far off…when someone delivers a half decent metric that compares all the advertising mediums together and the entire industry will collapse in on itself.
User ID not verified.
I’m not over it – FAR from it. I have huge admiration that Mumbrella IS continuing to spotlight this issue. “Over it” is such a MSM approach. In that old, tired, dying medium, yes, any and every confected outrage reduces to the old “fish and chip wrapper” within days of paper-selling – and we are expected to all forget and move on.
But Mumbrella is an industry media reflecting on itself – surely those within this industry are genuinely interested in “award winning” advertisements – where they ran, the campaign strategy, – the whole “sesame seed bun’s” worth of details, in fact.
So, OK the ads did run – so why didnt those involved say so – with pride and transparency – when the question was first asked??? Could it be that they themselves feel slimy about their ethics? Hmm?
User ID not verified.
What I don’t understand is why ads that are worthy of international awards are deemed only fit for a single run to qualify? Surely if they are the best ads in the world the companies they represent should be happy having them published more widely? It makes a farce of both the ad-world and the people who hand out the awards.
User ID not verified.
Re Em,
I can’t believe all the cheat lovers coming out of the woodwork above. Its a sad day.
Here is an idea. Lets not bash Eddie Obeid for scamming the electorate and anyone else he could scam. Lets celebrate his entrepreneurial success story. Instead lets bash some guys from overseas in an attempt to assist them in building a stronger more honest moral code while the creative industry resumes its ideation back here in Sodom and Gomorrah.
I will say one thing, the support above from the creative industry for the cheaters really does highlight just how far our creative industry has fallen. Its rancid.
If I was an Australian client I would start putting overseas agencies on pitches until we can clean up this thirst for fraud and dishonesty that seems to be systemic here in Australia.
Hey Em, when you partner starts knocking off your neighbour, don’t chastise him or her, have a trophy made and celebrate his or her success together.
User ID not verified.
Hi Out of Interest,
Thanks for the comment.
Obviously some campaigns are designed to run just once, and we accept that. But where the cost of production for an ad for a major brand way outstrips the media spend it deserves closer scrutiny.
From your IP address I see you’re posting from a big Sydney agency, so I’m sure you also have an interest in transparency around major awards.
Cheers,
Alex – editor, Mumbrella
Rob (No. 17),
very, very good points that you make.
User ID not verified.
Ouch, thats gota hurt. LOL
User ID not verified.
As a Client I feel that this is much a reflection of bad clients as cunning agencies. If clients bought better work then these agencies wouldn’t need to lower themselves to such shit practices.
Glad none of them are my agency however, or I’d fire them.
User ID not verified.
Looks like an opportunity for these publications to add an “awards” loading…
User ID not verified.
@Jason 4.22pm:
When you say:
“If I was an Australian client I would start putting overseas agencies on pitches until we can clean up this thirst for fraud and dishonesty that seems to be systemic here in Australia.”
Which overseas agencies would that be? The overseas agencies that work in markets that don’t scam awards shows?
If you think such a market exists, please let me know. I’ve judged in every major show and I’m telling you that this is NOT an Australian issue: it’s a global one.
Australia is a bit scammier than some markets, and quite a bit cleaner than many others. That’s an opinion borne from studying tens of thousands of entries over the last decade. Feel free to refute with your own informed opinion though, of course.
User ID not verified.
So many astroturfers infecting this thread. Decision makers client side need to take a good long hard look at their precious marketing budgets. Traditional business models in effect here guys. Agencies squandering their clients’ cash on their own self gain. Creating this so called masterpiece of an ad and then running it once is like a defence contractor manufacturing the most effective machine gun for their client (say The Army) and spending so much that the client receives only one bullet. CFO’s, client side, need to understand what their marketing budgets are being spent on.
User ID not verified.
AdGuy:
Good point, it will be tricky or as you suggest possibly impossible. Read it more as passion for a better way.
Out if curiosity, given your tenure, have you yourself ever cheated? If so am curious to hear your thoughts. Very few people who have commented over the last few weeks have confessed to cheating themselves. More over, if not critical, they have suggested its OK, or to leave things as they are.
I am keen to hear from a cheat about how they feel when winning a fraudulent award.
Have you cheated AdGuy. You must have won a few to be a judge.
User ID not verified.
Obviously JWT has enough margins and manpower on the J&J business to invest in the production, media placement and award fees for these one-offs.
I don’t think they will be asking for a fee adjustment in the next couple of years.
Or for an extension of deadlines citing insufficient creative resourcing on the business.
User ID not verified.
You clearly don’t remember Eastwood and the Manly Daily episode.
The biggest shame here is not that the ads ran once, making them eligible for entry.
The shame is they didn’t run as a massive marketing campaign. Imagine how much better everyone’s lives would be if that Combantrin thing was on the TV as opposed to whatever ‘what’s new’ shit they were forced to run.
Don’t discourage scam, encourage running it for real. It doesn’t just help sales, it helps stop people switching off whenever they see an irritating ad.
And for the marketers: Newsflash. Nobody gives a shit about your product. Sell it well.
User ID not verified.
@Jason 5.27PM
When I was a junior/midweight creative, I did a few scam jobs. I’ve always been motivated by real work that makes an impact out in the world, rather than just in the jury room… but back then I was impatient to make my mark and while I did my best on real paying jobs – I found that with the clients I had the best I could do was a local ‘bronze’ level.
ok, but I wanted to flex my muscle and get noticed. Print, Radio was where I played and won. But only with clients who paid. They may have been very marginal clients who didn’t pay much, but they always knew (and liked) what they were running.
Since I’ve been in the position where I could genuinely influence the direction of the agency and the output and the philosophy, I’ve had a strict no scam rule.
Haven’t entered print in years. Why? Because it’s a fake category and none of the works is real. And print is borderline irrelevant now to any marketer outside of fashion, beauty and watches. So it’s a waste of effort if you want to promote a brand.
my agency focuses on real paying work for real paying clients, and we win more than our fair share of awards. I think anyone scamming print at a senior level in a proper agency is pretty sad tbh. It’s lazy and holds no relevance to your client’s brands and what they’re trying to achieve, but also for your own career.
Would I hire you just because you’ve got a few gold lions for pretend ads in a marginal medium? No, I wouldn’t.
Show me proper integrated thinking on proper brands, or GTFO. My clients want work that will make their brands properly famous and relevant. Clever and cute print doesn’t do that, sorry.
But you know what? I look at someone scamming in print like I’d look at a bodybuilder in a Pro competition who uses steroids. Everyone’s doing it. Which doesn’t make it right, it just makes it a contest full of people breaking the rules. Most of the other categories are pretty clean. Sure, like all contests you’ll get the odd cheat… but mostly you’re seeing and judging real work.
User ID not verified.
Hi Mumbrella team, from your IP address I can see you are working from a boring industry publication full of journalists who can not secure jobs in the main stream media.
User ID not verified.
Well said Rob. Be great if clients had more confidence to get behind clever, edgy work.
Award shows are like fashion shows, the catwalk of advertising, not the everyday stuff on the department store racks. It’s a beauty contest. It’s an opportunity to show our wares, to inspire agency and clients to push harder. Clients are starting to take note.
Get over it Mumbrella, it is what it is.
User ID not verified.
Hi Big IP,
Worth also noting a lot of people have posted from your agency’s IP address before as well on Mumbrella. Got something to hide?
Cheers,
Alex – editor, Mumbrella
No Alex.
User ID not verified.
Could be time to start a weekly wrap up post which is top 5 agencies commenting on Mumbrella.
Bruised ego index?
User ID not verified.
Alex, your company has set up a public forum allowing anonymous feedback. If you want to start naming the IP addresses and agencies you need to change your comments forms to be registered users. Your numbers of comments will dwindle quickly, loosing fuel to your topical reporting, so I guess you will keep things as they are.
User ID not verified.
@alex Hayes This wouldn’t be the first time mumbrella has used the thinly vieled threat of knowing a readers I.P address. All you need to do is scan the comments that are contrary to mumbrella’s opinion and it is usually followed by; “well judging by your I.P…. The selective use of free press. I suspect, it would be rather revealing to have access to all the I.P’s from the comments of this blog. Would be interesting to see how many came from mumbrella’s own offices.
User ID not verified.
Hi Ipfreely,
The nature of anonymous commenting means people will take advantage to attack articles without disclosing the context – so when you work for an agency involved and you defend the practices in question, the correct thing to do would be to disclose it. Instead people hide behind anonymity to throw rocks.
As you’ll see from any comment thread we welcome a plurality of opinion, whether we agree or not. Many sites don’t do that.
It’s very easy to spot comments from the Mumbrella office they all carry our names.
Cheers,
Alex – editor, Mumbrella
While I applaud someone ‘calling them out’ so to speak, I know full well this practice exists in the print entries from every country. Particularly the UK, Brazil and many parts of Asia.
However, the number of times an ad ran doesn’t make it scam. If the client has approved it, signed a letter and the ad has run once, twice or even four times, it’s eligible for entry.
Take this years Grand Prix winning ‘GAYTM’ machines. How many machines did they build? Should that be revoked because it wasn’t a national campaign? No, and I’ll tell you why.
Print is dead, only true, top-to-bottom integrated campaigns work. Yes, every marketer wants to see their idea in print, but the only relevant media left is outdoor.
Look at the size of the Sydney Morning Herald these days.
User ID not verified.