After spending all last weekend exercising my position as Prosecutor during the selection of the finalist pieces for the 2006 Volcano, which added to a little more than 30 years as an advertiser, producer and Creative Director, I think I am in a privileged position to try to give an opinion about your comment.
Let’s start with what I agree with:
At Volcano, there will indeed be a mix of advertising pieces created and realized after a “brief” given by the client and ideas originated within the creative and design departments of our agencies.
Why? Because the rules of the Festival, in its point 4 states:
1. The objective of the festival is to hold a contest to reward and stimulate excellence in advertising creativity in Costa Rica (or internationally: CENTRAL AMERICAN CAMPAIGN), by recognizing the best advertising work to be judged during the festival.
In other words, it is a CREATIVE contest, a contest of ideas conceived to advertise something. It is not an advertising effectiveness contest like the Effie awards, as defined by its organization:
It constitutes the main professional distinction that recognizes the contribution of strategy and creativity to the achievement of objectives and results. In short, EFFIE focuses attention on effective advertising, the one that really works.
Now, once we have seen the differences between one type of contest and another, let’s take a look from my perspective (not very objective since, together with Eduardo Fernandez, I was the founder-creator of the Volcano and I believe in it), point by point the opinions of my good friend Jorge.
Message to the client: creativity is only for contests. There is always another way to see this point. When clients see creativity that takes risks, creativity that makes an impact, they have the opportunity to peek into a world in which they could one day participate and this could make our creativity “move” and not remain stagnant -as you exposed in one of your articles born from your visit to the Ojo de Ibero America-. Don’t you think this is beneficial?
Message to the creative: these are two different scenarios. It is not necessarily true that when we accept that creatives make material only for contests, we accept two scenarios: that of the clients (less creative) and that of the festivals (more creative). Again, what we are doing is making our own clients and “outsiders” realize that creativity exists, that ideas exist and that they can be theirs -in their own agency or in another one-, thus helping to “raise the bar” of originality and impact of ideas. Don’t you think this is beneficial?
Message to the executive and account director: to the client what he/she approves. The CEO of an advertising agency that endorses or promotes this practice should look for a job elsewhere. Advertising is a form of communication that uses persuasion and this tool does not exist without ideas. Executives and account managers who do not promote risky ideas that “cost” to get approval for, should look for a job putting stamps on a government agency. Doesn’t this seem beneficial?
Message to people in Media: only for awards. That’s right, soliciting favors “just for prizes” is a stupid practice. is there anyone who does it? I doubt it very much. However, the media are also interested in promoting good creativity, impactful ideas. Their media are more attractive with them. That’s why, from time to time, they agree to publish one of their ideas in the form of an ad for one agency or another, and at the same time, in a way, they also do a favor to the client whose brand is being advertised. And if the ad, the idea, works, doesn’t that seem beneficial?
Message to the planners: you are a formality… I find this point a bit contradictory. I think planners are the most useful for “digging” insights that allow us to develop relevant, risky and impactful ideas… yes, those same ones that are so often rejected by clients. For example: next to your comment about the Volcano, there is a piece from the Sprite campaign. A great work by Bernardo Geogehian, Regional Planning Director for our agency (Ogilvy) together with Gustavo Tareto, Creative Director. This campaign swept several advertising creativity festivals. Don’t you think this is beneficial?
Message to people in human resources: creative at any cost. This is a reality in any field today. People who are not creative are not wanted. Creative people are attracted to people like them and to creative environments where creativity, ideas, are respected. In our industry, like in the chocolate industry, you can’t make chocolate without cocoa… we can’t make ads without creativity, it’s our raw material. We have to get it and then take care of it, nurture it and develop it. Don’t you think this is beneficial?
Message to the general public: zap in commercials. When you say that by leaving creativity that entertains only for contests, we deny the public the possibility of entertainment with commercials, and with this, we miss the opportunity to get their attention and attraction, it seems to me that you enunciate something that is dangerous. Is creative advertising only that which entertains? Entertaining our consumers to communicate the possible benefit they will obtain with X, Y or Z product or service, is just one of many tactics applied to a communication strategy. The ways to seduce our consumers are as infinite as creativity itself, using them is our duty to avoid zapping. A contest that rewards original ideas with the capacity to seduce in a relevant way, don’t you think it would be beneficial?
To conclude, I would like to leave you with my opinion that neither consciences nor convictions are invited to a festival of advertising ideas. The main guests are ideas, infinite, unbound, flying free, taking risks and struggling to obtain the approval of our clients and the managers of some agencies, who sometimes misunderstand or distrust them. To try to change these behaviors is that there are festivals like Volcano and stop reading in your blog comments like this one, with which you end your article titled “WE STAGNATE”:
“I think this example reaffirms to us that we still have a lot of work to do and I agree with the Mexican, we are very stagnant.”