by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
button in toolbar for more information.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Please subscribe by clicking on the link to receive
Campaign Brief (AUS/NZ) Online.
Campaign Brief Magazine : July August 2008
swayed with a silken glove: It didn’t hur t a bit, in fact you almost enjoyed be ing manipulated. It is quite a skill, we Australians should take lessons. A stron g chairman of jud ges is critical. I t re quires b oth s trength and subtlety; An interesting mix to per suade heavy hitting g lobal Creative’s to s tick to the rules, co- operate and sometimes be generous but not to generous. A tall order for a gr oup o f p eople w ho g eneral ly believe they are always right: Craig Davis filled that role admirably. He had the ability to sense when things were afoot and to shut them down quickly, to motivate a fter hours of talking and to negotiate when it was needed. On viewing the work I r ealised PRESS JURY DARREN SPILLER PUBLICIS MOJO, MELBOURNE HAVING HAD THE HONOUR of judg- ing at this year’s Cannes Festival I must s ay i t was n othing l ike I thought it would be. The factions weren’t as strong, the politics not a s rife, the ego’s not so big and the exhaustion not as great as I was expecting. However on s aying t hat, there were seven and half thousand print ads to sort through in a matter of mere days with the added pressure of maintaining a very high Cannes standard. The first days are spent as though you were a check out chick beeping bar codes and scores. Muscles ache wit h repetitive act ions and you begin to resent Creative’s you don’t even know becau se they was ted your time and wrist action by enter- ing very bad work. Eventually the shortlist is calculat- ed and the fun begins. Alliances quickly form not f or Machiavellian reasons but through natural cultural leanings, more of a sense of simpatico than plotting. The S outh Americans are very astute when it comes to subtly lead- ing a jury. There tactic is a never ending barrage of words, almost conversational , a smile, another barrage of verbal descriptors, never swayi ng, diggi ng t he ir he al s in deeper until before you know it everyone is exhausted and capitu- lates one by one; the jury has been very quickly that the shortlist was debatable, even a little d odgy d ue to the pr ocess. Th e diff erence between a g ood shortlist and a s il- ver was often not that evident. Was it a lottery? I wouldn’t say that but could t he proces s be improved, certainly. A little more time would have been v aluable in the early stages. The shortlist is never seen in its entirety until after it has been publi shed, s o of cour se it le ft u s with n o time to d ebate, refine or rea lise j us t h ow libe ral we had been. One t hing i s t rue, a nd it ’s the great t hing abo ut Cannes, “Go ld always rises to the top”. Rarely was it debat ed an d most of th e ju ry were generous when a piece of cre- ative was de serving. Politics didn’t seem to come into it when the cre- ative was truly inspiring. When de ciding on y our e ntries take into a ccount the just slipp ed through theory, because a lot of it does. It i s an ex pensive awa rd; d on’t waste your award budget frivolous- OUTDOOR JURY GARRY HORNER WHYBIN\TBWA, SYDNEY SOME OF YOU MAY FEEL disappoint- ed, mystified an d n o d oubt g en- uinely pissed off about the results of the Outdoor Lions this year. And a very small number o f y ou will be happy. Not ecstatically happy, admittedly, but happy nonetheless. Not just because your work was recognised as being amongst the best in the world in 2007, or that as a result of that recognition your mate- rial worth in our rollercoaster of an industry is definitely on the up. But possibly because you actually did what few people at Cannes ever achieve and that is that you stood at the Gutter Bar at 4 in the morning, in June 2006, fuelled by numerous pints of Stella and pronounced to your fell ow bon vi vers t hat “Next year, ne xt y ear, I’ ll do i t”. So well done, you are that rare thing in our world, a m an - sor ry - a pe rson of your word. But back to the awards. Globally JU L Y /AUGUST 2 008 ly. Do h owever con sider t he f act that there a lot of judges with a lot of different opinions. Your opinion and some of theirs might just align, all to give you a little lion metal and an e ver inc reasingly co veted pr ize by an ever wider global advertising community. The s cam must be m entioned it was present and expected. At times the bluff was called and the creative was banished from the room, some- times with great sadness if it was a truly i nspirational p iece. Nobody likes to see a great idea wasted and no judge likes to be taken for a fool so beware juries are on the lookout and take it personally. I think more and more judges are taking i nto a ccount t he c ategory and the degree of difficulty. This can cr eate pr oblems in regards t o s tandards bu t I t hink experienced cr eative’s ar e r ealising it’s a hard industry and even harder to get great work to see the light of day: In respect to that they want to be generous and celebrate the work, to g ive c redit where c redit i s due and handicap the scam. Havi ng expe rienced th e beh ind the scenes machinations of the festi- val I ha ve a gr eater understanding of the shortlist, the qu estions and doubts I had about some past nom- inations. What did that piece of cre- ative ha ve th at mad e i t el igible o r simply wondering how did that slip through when I viewed the work at the palais. In short I will no longer waste my time po nderin g t hose question s even i f i t was only for a f ew min- utes, because there are no answers, there is no formula; It m ade the shortlist because it did, that’s it. On the o ther h and t he g reat work a s usual was awarded and applauded and in the end tha t’s what c ounts really. there were o ver 65 00 en tries i nto Outdoor, and for those of you who don’t know how it all works. The jur y of 12 was split into two,judging half the entries e ach, before reconvening to agree on the final shortlist. Int erestingly, its so well o rganised, that no jur or saw any work from his or her own coun- try, let alone his own agency in that first round. Each shorlisted piece is then voted on whether i t should remain on the shortlist or be a bronze, silver or gold Lion. In our case this was done twice, with only the golds then being eligible for the Grand Prix. Disappointingly, i t so on became apparent that a t l east a quarter of the entr ies should have been entered into Print. Now whilst I’m certainly no sub- scriber to massive logos, unbelieve- ably, those entrants had made no at tempt whatsoever to take into cons ider ation the nat ure of the medium. It became a bit of a game trying to guess who the client was, and in some cases what the product was. Which is pretty poor, when you consider that all of the work was ? CAM PAIGN B R I E F 27
May June 2008